From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 25 22:54:40 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0B011065677; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:54:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wg0-f50.google.com (mail-wg0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24A5E8FC1E; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:54:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wgbds11 with SMTP id ds11so4407903wgb.31 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:54:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Shxmdu4CZ1l+cAcJY/6y6EbqTb13LRLw/+Au4WEq+n4=; b=tvMEOjK/K5dF46T8491tl4OXBDG3zxT/VYIi4udum4JUraCGNv/cnJ7e22e0sPZPPZ Z6JYvfUEFg6e/ICrveHN/g9WHp+xc91CdPQZ6bvVwnHkJaR0rJUZgZKDxKCGZs12L8fi EMNf1i92NAP10qj2lOPnj/6KkdBMkqlOSjb1OShRcI+ppTuSqpFapgH1NKiYFk53z8N+ ftrHWgBseTAzFBpVSVYrtquM3t9cKK6vyW120vVYqZ3eIDMrk4zqPjUcBPHaNKUpMiXt 5yqhJViCd/v8sIOW/Nb3ib6+CRZC6y62msKvP9kYHTv5bG1nHye9CdY+iKr8T10gLO4N V0dQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.196.147 with SMTP id r19mr7454706wen.87.1340664877271; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:54:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.105.232 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:54:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:54:37 -0700 Message-ID: From: Jack Vogel To: Rick Miller Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Questions , Andrew Boyer Subject: Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:54:40 -0000 Glad you figured it out. Cheers, Jack On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Rick Miller wrote: > Turns out the gbic in the switch was bad...I didn't think there was a > problem on the host, but you all still gave me some good info. I > appreciate it! > > > > On 6/25/12, Rick Miller wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Jack Vogel wrote: > >> Would probably be good to take care of the storm threshold if you > >> haven't, > >> set it to 0 > >> and you disable the check, that's what we do internally. As for the > >> queues > >> and number > >> of descriptors, that's kind of up to you, different work loads and > >> environments work best > >> with different setups. > >> > >> Hopefully, when you get rid of the rx ring setup failure you will get > >> things > >> working. > > > > Thanks, Jack. I did get rid of the rx ring failure. Link status > > still shows no carrier. I think everything looks right from the > > host's perspective. > > > > -- > > Take care > > Rick Miller > > > > -- > Sent from my mobile device > > Take care > Rick Miller >