Hi all,
I need a help with following issue.
I have a board with six Ethernet cards (all e1000). Two of them are
currently used (eth0, eth2).
If I do ifdown eth0 and then ifup eth0 it lasts at least 30s (ping
reports destination host unreachable) until the card starts
send/receive packets
Filka Michal wrote:
Hi all,
I need a help with following issue.
I have a board with six Ethernet cards (all e1000). Two of them are
currently used (eth0, eth2).
If I do ifdown eth0 and then ifup eth0 it lasts at least 30s (ping
reports destination host unreachable) until the card
added maintainer's list
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, Ed Swierk wrote:
A recent patch to e1000, intended to avoid a race in the interrupt code,
seems to prevent the watchdog timer from resuming properly. It neuters
the effect of
/* fire a link change interrupt to start the watchdog */
lizard unreceptive hyypotensive deforciant
--
Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and
around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save
$200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009,
(cc netdev)
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:05:00 +0200
Roel Kluin roel.kl...@gmail.com wrote:
`!' has a higher precedence than `'
Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin roel.kl...@gmail.com
---
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
index febde45..49a9037 100644
---
On Thursday, April 16, 2009 Andrew Morton wrote:
(cc netdev)
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:05:00 +0200
Roel Kluin roel.kl...@gmail.com wrote:
`!' has a higher precedence than `'
Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin roel.kl...@gmail.com
---
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
From: Kirsher, Jeffrey T jeffrey.t.kirs...@intel.com
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:25:44 -0700
Dave - Can we pull this fix into net-2.6?
Just toss me a patch and I'll apply it directly.
--
Stay on top of everything new and
From: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:16:10 -0700
@@ -3946,7 +3946,7 @@ static void ixgbe_sfp_config_module_task(struct
work_struct *work)
}
hw-mac.ops.setup_sfp(hw);
-if (!adapter-flags IXGBE_FLAG_IN_SFP_LINK_TASK)
+if
Hi,
I updated to kernel 2.6.29.1 (from 2.6.22) yesterday and my Intel
82566MM fails to work now (eth0 is not recognized). First, I noticed
that the new kernel uses e1000e for this controller rather than e1000,
but I get the following in dmesg:
e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver -
Aditya Rajgarhia wrote:
Hi,
I updated to kernel 2.6.29.1 (from 2.6.22) yesterday and my Intel
82566MM fails to work now (eth0 is not recognized). First, I noticed
that the new kernel uses e1000e for this controller rather than e1000,
but I get the following in dmesg:
e1000e: Intel(R)
On Sunday, April 12, 2009 Charles-François Natali wrote:
Hi,
I'm sorry to bother you, but I'm having a weird problem with e1000
NIC, and I think you might be able to help me figure out what's
happening - I saw you submitted a patch for a problem dealing with
socket buffer a few years ago to the
11 matches
Mail list logo
