Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:22:30 +0100 From: Maxime Henrion <mux@freebsd.org> To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> Cc: FreeBSD amd64 mailing list <freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] if_sk(4) rx/tx "hangs" Message-ID: <20041113142230.GC32839@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.53.0411130912020.85716@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <Pine.BSF.4.53.0411130037360.85716@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net> <200411121739.40804.peter@wemm.org> <Pine.BSF.4.53.0411130912020.85716@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > 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. I have this exact model (skc0: PN: Yukon 88E8001) in my work computer. I had to use another NIC since this once was constantly wedging when sending too much data. I'll give this patch a try on Monday and let you know. Cheers, Maxime
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041113142230.GC32839>