Re: [E1000-devel] problem with simplified balancing on 82574 chips

2012-06-06 Thread Nishit Shah
Thanks for taking it up. Let me know in case if you require any help from my side. Rgds, Nishit Shah. On 6/6/2012 5:32 AM, Vick, Matthew wrote: -Original Message- From: Nishit Shah [mailto:nishit.s...@elitecore.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 11:43 PM To:

[E1000-devel] [next-net PATCH] drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e: fix unregistered net_device ethX name output by e1000e

2012-06-06 Thread Ethan Zhao
commit ca3ccc6835943287b6f69e973c126a02bc4de409 Author: ethan.zhao ethan.ker...@gmail.com Date: Wed Jun 6 07:32:11 2012 -0700 modified: drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/param.c While e1000e_check_options() is called, netdev is not registered, so the e1000e driver will print

Re: [E1000-devel] igb 82576 dropping multicast packets

2012-06-06 Thread Andrew J. Schorr
Hi Alex, I've done some further testing. I have considered these 4 configurations: queues cpus A. Fedora 14, builtin driver 2.1.0 8 1 B. Fedora 16, builtin driver 3.2.10 8 12 C. Fedora

Re: [E1000-devel] igb 82576 dropping multicast packets

2012-06-06 Thread Alexander Duyck
On 06/06/2012 07:57 AM, Andrew J. Schorr wrote: Hi Alex, I've done some further testing. I have considered these 4 configurations: queues cpus A. Fedora 14, builtin driver 2.1.08 1 B. Fedora 16, builtin driver

Re: [E1000-devel] Strange latency spikes/TX network stalls on Sun Fire X4150(x86) and e1000e

2012-06-06 Thread David Miller
From: Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 19:05:04 +0200 You cant hold a TX completion indefinitely, this breaks BQL but also other stuff. True. -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive

Re: [E1000-devel] igb 82576 dropping multicast packets

2012-06-06 Thread Alexander Duyck
On 06/06/2012 09:31 AM, Andrew J. Schorr wrote: Hi Alex, On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 08:33:33AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: On 06/06/2012 07:57 AM, Andrew J. Schorr wrote: queues cpus A. Fedora 14, builtin driver 2.1.0 8

Re: [E1000-devel] Strange latency spikes/TX network stalls on Sun Fire X4150(x86) and e1000e

2012-06-06 Thread Tom Herbert
I'm not exactly sure what the exact effect of WTHRESH is here. Does the device coalesce 5 completions regardless of size? Would the problem be avoided if bql limit_min were MTU, or could same issue be hit with larger that 64 byte packets? Tom On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Hiroaki SHIMODA

Re: [E1000-devel] Strange latency spikes/TX network stalls on Sun Fire X4150(x86) and e1000e

2012-06-06 Thread David Miller
From: Tom Herbert therb...@google.com Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 11:21:40 -0700 I'm not exactly sure what the exact effect of WTHRESH is here. Does the device coalesce 5 completions regardless of size? Would the problem be avoided if bql limit_min were MTU, or could same issue be hit with larger

Re: [E1000-devel] query for i350 network card test under linux

2012-06-06 Thread Wyborny, Carolyn
-Original Message- From: Jack Wang [mailto:jack_w...@usish.com] Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2012 11:56 PM To: Linux NICS Cc: e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [E1000-devel] query for i350 network card test under linux Hi all, I want to find a tool to verify the network card hardware

Re: [E1000-devel] Strange latency spikes/TX network stalls on Sun Fire X4150(x86) and e1000e

2012-06-06 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 11:23:32 -0700 (PDT) David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote: From: Tom Herbert therb...@google.com Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 11:21:40 -0700 I'm not exactly sure what the exact effect of WTHRESH is here. Does the device coalesce 5 completions regardless of size? Would the

Re: [E1000-devel] Hardware Timestamping in i350-T4

2012-06-06 Thread Vick, Matthew
-Original Message- From: Arthur LENA [mailto:arthur.l...@ftw.at] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 1:25 AM To: e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [E1000-devel] Hardware Timestamping in i350-T4 Hello everyone, I have been working with the i350-T4 ethernet card to test a packet

Re: [E1000-devel] igb 82576 dropping multicast packets

2012-06-06 Thread Alexander Duyck
On 06/06/2012 01:44 PM, Andrew J. Schorr wrote: Hi Alex, On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 10:53:54AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: Actually the interrupt layout could have a significant impact. Do you happen to know if CPU C states are enabled on your system? You can verify this by checking with a

Re: [E1000-devel] [next-net PATCH] drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e: fix unregistered net_device ethX name output by e1000e

2012-06-06 Thread Jeff Kirsher
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 22:57 +0800, Ethan Zhao wrote: commit ca3ccc6835943287b6f69e973c126a02bc4de409 Author: ethan.zhao ethan.ker...@gmail.com Date: Wed Jun 6 07:32:11 2012 -0700 modified: drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/param.c While e1000e_check_options() is called,

Re: [E1000-devel] [next-net PATCH] drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e: fix unregistered net_device ethX name output by e1000e

2012-06-06 Thread Allan, Bruce W
-Original Message- From: Jeff Kirsher [mailto:jeffrey.t.kirs...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 5:41 PM To: Ethan Zhao Cc: e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Linux NICS; LKML Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] [next-net PATCH] drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e: fix unregistered

Re: [E1000-devel] [PATCH 1/2] e1000e: Disable ASPM L1 on 82574

2012-06-06 Thread Greg KH
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 10:17:08PM +0100, Chris Boot wrote: On 23/04/2012 22:29, Chris Boot wrote: ASPM on the 82574 causes trouble. Currently the driver disables L0s for this NIC but only disables L1 if the MTU is 1500. This patch simply causes L1 to be disabled regardless of the MTU

Re: [E1000-devel] query for i350 network card test under linux

2012-06-06 Thread Jack Wang
Hi all, I want to find a tool to verify the network card hardware if functional under Linux, does any one know. I have already tried ethtool v3.2 with igb driver 3.4.7. but ethtool -t ethx external_lb is always return : ethtool -t eth14 external_lb The test result is FAIL