Hello. That's good news. I'll second that the patch worked
perfectly.
-thanks
-Brian
On Dec 7, 9:40am, Masanobu SAITOH wrote:
} Subject: Re: Possible regression in wm(4)?
} On 2017/12/06 22:26, Bert Kiers wrote:
} > On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 04:40:37PM +0900, Masanobu SAITOH wr
On 2017/12/06 22:26, Bert Kiers wrote:
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 04:40:37PM +0900, Masanobu SAITOH wrote:
Hi, all
On 2017/11/22 0:21, Bert Kiers wrote:
Hi,
A different computer with the same type motherboard has the same
problem. A quad I350 (also wm(4)) works fine (with GENERIC netbsd-8
Hi, all
On 2017/11/22 0:21, Bert Kiers wrote:
Hi,
A different computer with the same type motherboard has the same
problem. A quad I350 (also wm(4)) works fine (with GENERIC netbsd-8
kernel).
Still wondering what queue drops are.
Grtnx,
Could you test the following diff?
Hi,
A different computer with the same type motherboard has the same
problem. A quad I350 (also wm(4)) works fine (with GENERIC netbsd-8
kernel).
Still wondering what queue drops are.
Grtnx,
--
B*E*R*T
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:54:56AM +0100, Bert Kiers wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:31:59AM +0900, Kengo NAKAHARA wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> Hi,
>
> > > But still no traffic.
> >
> > Oh, the dmesg is as expected, but the behavior is not.
> > Hmm, sorry, could you give me the following
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:31:59AM +0900, Kengo NAKAHARA wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> > But still no traffic.
>
> Oh, the dmesg is as expected, but the behavior is not.
> Hmm, sorry, could you give me the following information?
> + "intrctl list" result on NetBSD-8
> - before trying traffic
Hi,
On 2017/11/14 21:53, Bert Kiers wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 08:07:46PM +0900, Kengo NAKAHARA wrote:
>> I'm sorry I cannot solve it...
>> Hmm, now I think this problem may relate to MSI/MSI-X interrupts
>> setting about ioapic. If it is not a problem, could you try the
>> following patch?
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 08:07:46PM +0900, Kengo NAKAHARA wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> I'm sorry I cannot solve it...
> Hmm, now I think this problem may relate to MSI/MSI-X interrupts
> setting about ioapic. If it is not a problem, could you try the
> following patch?
> I believe this patch let wm(4) do
Hi,
On 2017/11/14 19:33, Bert Kiers wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 12:34:40PM +0900, Kengo NAKAHARA wrote:
>
> I am sorry to have to say they both do not fix the problem.
>
>> == (A) ==
>> --- a/sys/dev/pci/if_wm.c
>> +++ b/sys/dev/pci/if_wm.c
>> @@ -4883,8 +4883,8 @@
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 12:34:40PM +0900, Kengo NAKAHARA wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
I am sorry to have to say they both do not fix the problem.
> == (A) ==
> --- a/sys/dev/pci/if_wm.c
> +++ b/sys/dev/pci/if_wm.c
> @@ -4883,8 +4883,8 @@ wm_adjust_qnum(struct wm_softc *sc, int nvectors)
>
Hi,
On 2017/11/11 7:23, Bert Kiers wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 08:23:21PM +0100, Jimmy Johansson wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> Has anybody else had issues with these interfaces in NetBSD 8 or NetBSD
>> current?
>
> yes, see kern/52717: no wm(4) networking in 8.0_BETA
> also with i82576
Hmm, it
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 08:23:21PM +0100, Jimmy Johansson wrote:
Hi,
> Has anybody else had issues with these interfaces in NetBSD 8 or NetBSD
> current?
yes, see kern/52717: no wm(4) networking in 8.0_BETA
also with i82576
Grtnx,
--
B*E*R*T
Hello current users!
We've been trying to install both NetBSD 8 and NetBSD current on a
ProLiant DL170h G6 with Intel i82576 network interfaces.
Strangely we can set addresses on the interfaces, but we can't send or
receive any traffic.
We tried NetBSD 7 as well, where everything works as
13 matches
Mail list logo
