From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 25 14:49:37 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9842D1065674; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:49:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vrwmiller@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ob0-f182.google.com (mail-ob0-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 482E78FC19; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:49:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obbun3 with SMTP id un3so8414353obb.13 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 07:49:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=nB6QS85OOOQnD6mMJg+wpsOSZvnoLZOHp/LjqllHatc=; b=wo+3N2p7o4kofI0SpT2ylNzzLyq1qakFKZzBn1aiYJ7cXQpYI6TlhX17P+quSFh2ig 9OfhweXmieZtihv8fMtrfvaMZMIDURocY3te45O3b4oJylKTh4KT/XyCRtMxRrbFtPiR g8gbzn821AtBtMaxt1gUo6ehQQZ/3d5naZSBNFUHwSzy9MRbIcnKQAlos7cxgBUad7w2 ga6lsQZbRVbf4BGVDNMATpXMwGSyFFreBzeKL58HqnH/mGOg7DI0dS6EPZ9ZnXlF5Nki V0zmPufNxWp216s9uKO3//zXcLtUNiYCeYnqyz8d+d91aobmo21D6NhNZnpaAsyOBHvE T5MQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.45.72 with SMTP id k8mr12508056obm.51.1340635776771; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 07:49:36 -0700 (PDT) Sender: vrwmiller@gmail.com Received: by 10.182.10.34 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 07:49:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 10:49:36 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: bpG2_x2e8TfyEUvImKMDiw-qL6Y Message-ID: From: Rick Miller To: Jack Vogel Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Questions , Andrew Boyer Subject: Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:49:37 -0000 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