Can you outline the changes? Anything with the general processing? I have to
makea case to hold off a deployment.
and what happened to 9, 10, and 11?
Laurie
--- On Fri, 5/17/13, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Is there any way to limit the
Version numbers result from my work internally, and sometimes they
increment due to a build issue, or a bug found that needs to be corrected,
so unfortunately its not always a neat progression. I have thought at times
about having a separate revision sequence but that would make for other
issues,
I have to make a case to wait for the new version or to deploy the current
version.
Are there structural improvements to the driver, or just peripheral features?
We're usingx540 NICs.
Laurie
--- On Sat, 5/18/13, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com
Subject:
Did you get to commit that new code yet?
Laurie
--- On Sat, 5/4/13, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Is there any way to limit the amount of data in an mbuf chain
submitted to a driver?
To: Richard Sharpe realrichardsha...@gmail.com
Cc: FreeBSD
No Laurie, I ran into an issue that I needed to resolve, and then my
validation engineer
went out of town a couple days. Should be early next week.
Jack
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Laurie Jennings
laurie_jennings_1...@yahoo.com wrote:
Did you get to commit that new code yet?
Laurie
Hi folks,
I understand better why I am seeing EINVAL intermittently when sending
data from Samba via SMB2.
The ixgbe driver, for TSO reasons, limits the amount of data that can
be DMA'd to 65535 bytes. It returns EINVAL for any mbuf chain larger
than that.
The SO_SNDBUF for that socket is set
.. and please file a PR. I'm sure Jack will love this kind of feedback. :)
Thanks for doing this debugging! I'm glad to see others getting dirty
in the network stack.
Adrian
On 4 May 2013 06:52, Richard Sharpe realrichardsha...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks,
I understand better why I am
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 4 May 2013 06:52, Richard Sharpe realrichardsha...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks,
I understand better why I am seeing EINVAL intermittently when sending
data from Samba via SMB2.
The ixgbe driver, for TSO reasons, limits
If you don't use TSO you will hurt your TX performance significantly from
the tests that I've run. What exactly is the device you are using, I don't
have the source in front of me now, but I'm almost sure that the limit is
not 64K but 256K, or are you using some ancient version of the driver?
Yes, I checked: #define IXGBE_TSO_SIZE 262140
So, the driver is not limiting you to 64K assuming you are using a
version of recent vintage.
Jack
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
If you don't use TSO you will hurt your TX performance significantly from
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
If you don't use TSO you will hurt your TX performance significantly from
the tests that I've run. What exactly is the device you are using, I don't
have the source in front of me now, but I'm almost sure that the limit is
not
On 04.05.2013 22:47, Jack Vogel wrote:
Yes, I checked: #define IXGBE_TSO_SIZE 262140
So, the driver is not limiting you to 64K assuming you are using a
version of recent vintage.
The stack won't generate TCP and IP packets larger than 64K. However
the ethernet header gets prepended to it
Hmmm, so its the stack, can that be easily increased Andre?
Regards,
Jack
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Andre Oppermann an...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 04.05.2013 22:47, Jack Vogel wrote:
Yes, I checked: #define IXGBE_TSO_SIZE 262140
So, the driver is not limiting you to 64K assuming
Ahh, Twinville, new hardware :) The version at the tip is 2.5.8 and I am
working on version 2.5.12 internally that I hope to commit next week...
so your version is a bit old :) I would do some testing on newer code.
Jack
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Richard Sharpe
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
Ahh, Twinville, new hardware :) The version at the tip is 2.5.8 and I am
working on version 2.5.12 internally that I hope to commit next week...
so your version is a bit old :) I would do some testing on newer code.
I would
On 05/04/2013 04:19 PM, Richard Sharpe wrote:
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
Ahh, Twinville, new hardware :) The version at the tip is 2.5.8 and I am
working on version 2.5.12 internally that I hope to commit next week...
so your version is a bit old :) I
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Eric van Gyzen e...@vangyzen.net wrote:
On 05/04/2013 04:19 PM, Richard Sharpe wrote:
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
Ahh, Twinville, new hardware :) The version at the tip is 2.5.8 and I am
working on version 2.5.12
17 matches
Mail list logo
