Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 23:58:58 +0200 From: Dmitry Ivanov <dimss@solutions.lv> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rl0: watchdog timeout Message-ID: <200412172358.58286.dimss@solutions.lv> In-Reply-To: <20041217083524.12a575bc.nico.meijer@zonnet.nl> References: <E1CeeVc-00018M-00.gtsy-mail-ru@f12.mail.ru> <200412162023.26041.dimss@solutions.lv> <20041217083524.12a575bc.nico.meijer@zonnet.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 17 December 2004 09:35, Nico Meijer wrote: > I don't (and won't, unless forced) use Intel NICs, so I cannot speak > of them. I've had the very unpleasant experience of having had to > deal with a fierce network boost on a RealTek 8139 (don't ask...) in > a linux box. It meant the nic (and thus the machine) was unavailable > for 15 minutes. Other machines (which were not mine) which > experienced the boost, were humming along nicely. So thanks, I'll pay > $50 extra for the nic. Is there anything more than high reliability in Intel/3COM NICs? Do they produce less interrupts? I've heard rumors that they do some packet processing themselves thus offloading CPU. Is that true? If so, where can I check that in kernel source? -- ...python is just now at 2.4? perl is 3.4 better!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200412172358.58286.dimss>