Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:53:38 +0700 From: Akhmad Sakirun <saki@pacific.net.id> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Network often not responding Message-ID: <4110641836.20060810205338@pacific.net.id> In-Reply-To: <44DB2FDD.60705@goodforbusiness.co.uk> References: <496795293.20060809195310@pacific.net.id> <44D9ECB9.5020500@goodforbusiness.co.uk> <20060809171917.GA32202@localhost.localdomain> <44DB2FDD.60705@goodforbusiness.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I little bit frustated after getting no luck with Pyun YongHyeon patch, i run cvsup today and going to see what happen tomorrow. It's happen only on bussy hour/work hour but not on afternoon until morning. it's mean only happen when on maximum/heavy traffic load. I suspected it's error on motherboard or the system. now i'm using 2 ethernet using 2 different catalyst switch and 2 different network. 1st ethernet: em0: <Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection Version - 6.0.5> port 0xa800-0xa83f mem 0xfeaa0000-0xfeabffff,0xfea80000-0xfea9ffff irq 18 at device 3.0 on pci2 em0: Ethernet address: 00:e0:81:31:af:ca em0: [FAST] 2nd ethernet: xl0: <3Com 3c905B-TX Fast Etherlink XL> port 0xa880-0xa8ff mem 0xfeafec00-0xfeafec7f irq 19 at device 7.0 on pci2 miibus0: <MII bus> on xl0 xlphy0: <3Com internal media interface> on miibus0 xlphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto xl0: Ethernet address: 00:10:5a:0d:c1:45 Best regards, Thursday, August 10, 2006, 8:08:45 PM, Dominic wrote: > Stanislaw Halik wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 09, 2006, Dominic Marks wrote: >>>> Aug 9 15:09:16 cache kernel: xl0: transmission error: 90 >>>> Aug 9 15:09:16 cache kernel: xl0: tx underrun, increasing tx start >>>> threshold to 120 bytes >> >>> dc%d: TX underrun -- increasing TX threshold The device generated a >>> transmit underrun error while attempting to DMA and transmit a packet. >>> This happens if the host is not able to DMA the packet data into the >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> NIC's FIFO fast enough. The driver will dynamically increase the >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> trans- mit start threshold so that more data must be DMAed into the >>> FIFO before the NIC will start transmitting it onto the wire." >> >>> So it would seem like the card cannot keep pace with the system. What NICs >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> have you tried? >> >> Basing on the quoted text, isn't it the opposite? >> > Yep! I should read more than the first line on things, especially when > quoting > them to others :) > Dom > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4110641836.20060810205338>