From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 13 09:30:11 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1248516A4CE; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:30:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from transport.cksoft.de (transport.cksoft.de [62.111.66.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72EF343D48; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:30:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net) Received: from transport.cksoft.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by transport.cksoft.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63F1B1FF931; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 10:30:08 +0100 (CET) Received: by transport.cksoft.de (Postfix, from userid 66) id 606FF1FF92F; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 10:30:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.int.zabbadoz.net (Postfix, from userid 1060) id C2E8C155D0; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:27:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.int.zabbadoz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8107154FC; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:27:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:27:13 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" X-X-Sender: bz@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net To: Peter Wemm In-Reply-To: <200411121739.40804.peter@wemm.org> Message-ID: References: <200411121739.40804.peter@wemm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS cksoft-s20020300-20031204bz on transport.cksoft.de cc: FreeBSD current mailing list cc: FreeBSD amd64 mailing list Subject: Re: [PATCH] if_sk(4) rx/tx "hangs" X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:30:11 -0000 On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Peter Wemm wrote: > > Try something less CPU intensive like /dev/zero :) > > I think he was saying he created a 1GB file from the contents > of /dev/urandom and then timed the transfer of this over 100Mbit/sec > link. that's it but I had been to lazy to tell you the whole dd story in te middle of the night. I preffer random data when sometimes testing over ssh all zero get's easily compressed ;) > Anyway, the point was that it worked! Could the problem with the K8V SE > really be as simple as we've been hardcoding 128K of ram for a device > that only has 64K? It's not directly a matter of the K8V SE. It's the 88E8001 (but at least my K8V SE deluxe has this one acording to the PN from VPD data). The 88E8010 already has 128k according to the pdf mentioned in my diff. Anyone actually tested it ? Mine still seems to be fine after the night. -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT