Paul Irofti wrote: > On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 11:00:07PM +0200, Paul Irofti wrote: >> Strange, the dmesg I submitted (and the one dmesg shows:) both point to >> my configuration before the snapshot update. But the login informs me >> that I'm running ``OpenBSD 4.1-beta (GENERIC) #847'' and uname says the >> same: >> >> $ uname -rsv >> OpenBSD 4.1 GENERIC#847 > > After a reboot /var/run/dmesg.boot is a mess...well at least it shows > the right version (a couple of times), an incorrect one and some garbage > at the beginning. Attached. ...
Looks like I need to do some updates to the dmesg portions of the FAQ... First of all, regarding your dmesg: that's a feature, not a bug. The system attempts to store multiple dmesgs in RAM and keep them after a reboot. This can be very handy at times, but disconcerting to those not expecting it. The last one is the one you want. As for your performance problem, I don't currently have a vr(4) in use, but I've got one in the machine I'm currently working on, and it worked pretty decently last time I used it (switched to a different, probably lower-grade NIC for non-performance reasons). Mine: > vr0 at pci0 dev 18 function 0 "VIA RhineII-2" rev 0x74: irq 3, address > 00:0c:6e:d5:dd:68 > rlphy1 at vr0 phy 1: RTL8201L 10/100 PHY, rev. 1 Yours: > vr0 at pci0 dev 18 function 0 "VIA RhineII-2" rev 0x7c: irq 11, address > 00:e0:12:34:56:78 > rlphy0 at vr0 phy 1: RTL8201L 10/100 PHY, rev. 1 Yours is a different revision, but I suspect your problem isn't with the NIC. Most network performance problems boil down to: * Duplex issues * b/B confusion (bits vs. Bytes per second) * bad cables * bad switches (ok, maybe that's just been my luck) If you really believe it isn't any of the above, tell us how your machine is hooked up, what you tested, what you expected, what you saw, etc. Simply saying "it's slow" doesn't help us track it down much, you understand... Nick.
