Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 10:58:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: David Greenman-Lawrence <dg@root.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, jamie@tridentmicrosystems.co.uk, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Broadcom BCM5701 Chipset problems Message-ID: <200205131758.g4DHwJFj068941@apollo.backplane.com> References: <20020513115600.A50967@mufuf.trident-uk.co.uk> <3CDFF60C.48A2EA65@mindspring.com> <20020513102526.H72322@nexus.root.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:>If you aren't using VLAN tagging, you shouldn't care.
:
: No, that is absolutely not correct. The checksum problems happend in many
:situations, depending on the chipset and other factors. The problem that
:resulted in the commit to disable the receive hardware checksum was caused
:by small packets with certain byte patterns, NOT VLAN ENCAPSULATION.
:
:-DG
:
:David Greenman-Lawrence
100% confirmation here. When Bill Paul was tracking down these issues
on my 2550's they were all operating normally, without any vlan tagging.
The broadcom chips are horrendously buggy. The phase of the moon is as
likely to cause a problem as anything else. The on-chip checksum code
is especially bad. It's a classic example of rushing a chip into
production and praying that the hardware is flexible enough that
problems can be fixed in software by the driver.
-Matt
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200205131758.g4DHwJFj068941>