From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 4 05:19:32 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83738BE6; Wed, 4 Sep 2013 05:19:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hoomanfazaeli@gmail.com) Received: from mail-we0-x230.google.com (mail-we0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6E072DC8; Wed, 4 Sep 2013 05:19:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-we0-f176.google.com with SMTP id u56so3288196wes.35 for ; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 22:19:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kpfU4GTMTbiD6W07pD1hXOpPX4G6TVomo8bz66NtsiA=; b=S2iHGQsWvoJiC5fyF3CeJrbXt7Ka8c2WGEAH7/9ZSsTG3lnKFNfE7TOoLR+fpCozKn si771iqU5/Te8JRCwEV6TwAU8BJUqnIQVTHfHZMn7NoUi+2Idh72Mvoqnuz69zE7FcW4 xf6e3UZRhTbX2BXbk3eFskXO+rxRMcX8DJvE8bOzMnQbW+423odudNrY0aO0qGG38Fs6 Td2WX6qamPboL2ckCJjqcPzEiBrDibT3r5CIZZElR7PLP1rnkLp8qqN+dz8O1RpRJI7L i9wJTqvJsK2xMhfQkglZjESKiX+2sevEDSmwBk7vq5LAUxDqMuJSbc1ZpeWl0+qiXzlu u1mg== X-Received: by 10.180.9.69 with SMTP id x5mr510004wia.41.1378271970222; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 22:19:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.30] ([2.176.240.65]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ey2sm1057695wib.5.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 03 Sep 2013 22:19:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5226C2E0.8020800@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 09:49:28 +0430 From: Hooman Fazaeli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130215 Thunderbird/17.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer Subject: Re: TSO and FreeBSD vs Linux References: <520A6D07.5080106@freebsd.org> <5214F506.3070706@freebsd.org> <20130903192734.GA19406@albert.catwhisker.org> <20130903224928.GQ1577@albert.catwhisker.org> <5226BCE1.40107@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <5226BCE1.40107@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Net , David Wolfskill X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 05:19:32 -0000 On 9/4/2013 9:23 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 9/4/13 6:49 AM, David Wolfskill wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 12:27:34PM -0700, David Wolfskill wrote: >>> ... >>> As soon as I issued "sudo net.inet.tcp.tso=0" ... the copy worked without >>> a hitch or a whine. And I was able to copy all 117709618 bytes, not just >>> 2097152 (2^21). >> The above command should (of course) have read >> >> sudo sysctl net.inet.tcp.tso=0 >> >> Also: I normally had the em0 NIC on the machine in question connected to >> a Netgear GS105 (5-port Gigabit switch). In the process of >> trouble-shooting the problem with NFS writes, I bypassed that switch and >> connected the em0 NIC directly to the jack in my cube. >> >> In that configuration, the em0 NIC showed "media: Ethernet 1000baseT >> (autoselect)", while connected to the GS105, it showed "media: Ethernet >> 100baseTX (autoselect)". >> >> While the NFS write worked whether or not I had the GS105 in the path, >> it seemed ... suboptimal ... to have a NIC capable of 1000baseT >> connected to a Gigabit switch, but negotiating at 100baseTX. >> >> So I tried setting the media via "ifconfig em0 media 1000baseT"; after a >> few seconds, it finally woke back up, and now reports "media: Ethernet >> 1000baseT (1000baseT )". >> >> So it appears that the em(4) driver and Intel 82578DM NIC fail to >> negotiate 1000baseT with the Netgear GS105. > > yeah auto-negotiation seems a bit fragile.. not just for us either.. > I often end up hardwiring it in rc.conf. > I had also experienced similar problems (one case was 82574 with cisco 3550). I also remember cases when auto-select worked but fixed media did not (link was settled down to 100 or half-duplex) I am curious as what is the exact technical reason(s) for such media problems? Are they more hardware or driver related? -- Best regards. Hooman Fazaeli