Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 16:11:53 +0100 From: Claudio Jeker <cjeker@diehard.n-r-g.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: em driver, 82574L chip, and possibly ASPM Message-ID: <20101123151153.GB27694@diehard.n-r-g.com> In-Reply-To: <icgerb$gnj$1@dough.gmane.org> References: <icgd44$89l$1@dough.gmane.org> <4CEBBB8F.70400@sentex.net> <icgerb$gnj$1@dough.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 02:16:35PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote: > On 11/23/10 14:03, Mike Tancsa wrote: > >On 11/23/2010 7:47 AM, Ivan Voras wrote: > >>It looks like I'm unfortunate enough to have to deploy on a machine > >>which has the 82574L Intel NIC chip on a Supermicro X8SIE-F board, which > >>apparently has hardware issues, according to this thread: > >> > >>http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=2908463&group_id=42302&atid=447449 > >> > >> > > > >Interesting, this is the same nic that has been giving me grief! Mine is > >on an Intel server board (S3420GPX). The symptoms are VERY similar to > >what the LINUX user sees as well with RX errors and the traffic patterns. > > I've posted detailed info on this NIC in the thread "em card > wedging" - can you compare it with yours? > > The whole thing looks very sensitive to BIOS settings. I've just > toggled something that looked unrelated (don't remember what, I've > been toggling BIOS settings all day) and the machine has been doing > a flood-ping for 20 minutes without wedging (which doesn't mean it > won't wedge as soon as I send this message, it did such things > before). > > One other thing, I don't know if this is normal as I've only just > noticed it: flood-pinging a machine (also a FreeBSD machine, on the > same switch) and monitoring the packet rates with netstat I see that > the rates begin at something like 8,000 PPS (in either direction) > and then slowly over a timespan of 5-10 minutes climb to 100,000 PPS > (again, in either direction). > > Since this is gigabit LAN with a Cisco switch, I'd say the 100,000 > PPS should be correct. The other machine I'm pinging also has an em > card but a "desktop class" one. Is this slow-start expected / > normal? > Yes, this is how ping -f works. ping -f sends a packet whenever it received a response or when a timer fired (IIRC that one is set to 1ms). So ping -f will not ramp up if the delay is smaller then the internal timer and hover around 1/delay pps until packet loss or bigger delays happen. -- :wq Claudio
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20101123151153.GB27694>