On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 03:04:59PM -0400, Len Brown wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008, Len Brown wrote:
>
> > > Linux version 2.6.18-53.el5
>
> can you find out if the latest upstream kernel still has this problem?
Len,
We'd tried 2.6.25 and found it doesnt help.
> > > ACPI: PCI Interrupt 00
On Wed, 25 Jun 2008, Len Brown wrote:
> > Linux version 2.6.18-53.el5
can you find out if the latest upstream kernel still has this problem?
> > ACPI: PCI Interrupt :00:1d.1[B] -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 177
> > PCI: Setting latency timer of device :00:1d.1 to 64
> > uhci_hcd :
Vatsa,
This is not legacy mode that causes long ping time.
---henry
--- On Wed, 6/25/08, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] Strange problem with e1000 driver - ping packet
> loss
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 08:40:47AM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> Looks reasonable to me.. and what does /proc/interrupts show with this
> setup?
Sorry about the delay, but here's /proc/interrupts:
CPU0
0:1342021IO-APIC-edge timer
1:416IO-APIC-edge i80
cc'ing netdev
Robert Hancock wrote:
> Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I happened to look at a system which was exhibiting poor ping
>> performance with e1000 driver (in 2.6.25) and had some questions
>> regarding that.
>>
>> Ping test was done between the system and a laptop, which were c
Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 11:25:12AM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
>> Can you post your dmesg output from bootup with no special options (noacpi,
>> etc.) enabled?
>
> Here it is (from RHEL5 kernel, no special boot options):
Looks reasonable to me.. and what does /proc/i
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 11:25:12AM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> Can you post your dmesg output from bootup with no special options (noacpi,
> etc.) enabled?
Here it is (from RHEL5 kernel, no special boot options):
Linux version 2.6.18-53.el5 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 4.1.2 20070626
(
On 6/19/08, Robert Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >I happened to look at a system which was exhibiting poor ping
> > performance with e1000 driver (in 2.6.25) and had some questions regarding
> that.
> >
> > Ping test was done between the system a
Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> Hi,
> I happened to look at a system which was exhibiting poor ping
> performance with e1000 driver (in 2.6.25) and had some questions regarding
> that.
>
> Ping test was done between the system and a laptop, which were connected
> using a straight ethernet cable
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 12:18:30PM -0700, Brandeburg, Jesse wrote:
> > # cat /proc/interrupts
> > 10: 2296XT-PIC-XTata_piix, eth0, eth1
>
> whats wrong with your system that you can't use acpi and/or apic? It
> would probably orthoginally solve the problem by unsharing your
> in
Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> Hi,
> I happened to look at a system which was exhibiting poor ping
> performance with e1000 driver (in 2.6.25) and had some questions
> regarding that.
> ...
> Upon some investigation, I found that the interrupt count field in
> /proc/interrupts (associated with
Hi,
I happened to look at a system which was exhibiting poor ping
performance with e1000 driver (in 2.6.25) and had some questions regarding that.
Ping test was done between the system and a laptop, which were connected
using a straight ethernet cable. Ping reported round trip times runnin
12 matches
Mail list logo
