Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:56:40 +0200
From:      Pierre Beyssac <beyssac@enst.fr>
To:        Bill Paul <wpaul@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu>, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Still waiting for xl driver reports
Message-ID:  <19991012155640.A448@enst.fr>
In-Reply-To: <199910102059.QAA24189@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu>; from Bill Paul on Sun, Oct 10, 1999 at 04:59:34PM -0400
References:  <199910102059.QAA24189@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 10, 1999 at 04:59:34PM -0400, Bill Paul wrote:
> A while back I posted a message here saying that I'd changed the xl driver
> a bit to hopefully improve performance for 3c90xB and later adapters (i.e.
> the "cyclone," "hurricane" and "tornado" chipsets). I asked for people
> to report if the changes helped, hurt, made no difference or were totally 
> broken.
> 
> So far not one person has said so much as a word to me on this subject.

I use the xl device (two cards: xl0 and xl1) in my kernel (compiled
on October 4th) and hadn't realized I was using the new driver. I
only noticed weird things last Sunday when the interface hung while
I was trying a tcpdump on it (I was loggued remotely, which explains
why I saw the problem immediately)... Then there was a "xl1: watchdog
timeout" and things went back to normal.

I compiled today's kernel to see if it made any difference, and I
can confirm I can repeat it easily you wish. The watchdog timeout
seems to happen every time I get out of promiscuous mode, and (very
seldom) at other random moments.

> To reiterate, this only concerns people with the following adapters:

Here's what I have:

xl0: <3Com 3c900-COMBO Etherlink XL> irq 11 at device 10.0 on pci2
xl0: Ethernet address: 00:10:5a:bf:13:96
xl0: selecting 10baseT transceiver, half duplex
xl1: <3Com 3c905B-TX Fast Etherlink XL> irq 11 at device 17.0 on pci0
xl1: Ethernet address: 00:c0:4f:67:0b:82

It's on xl1 that I have problems, although I'm not sure this wouldn't
happen on xl0 too (xl0 is configured down at the moment).

Now regarding performance, I haven't made extensives tests. The
closest thing to that that I have in mind is to stretch that
2*100Mbps trunking link we configured this morning between two of
our ethernet switches :-)
-- 
Pierre Beyssac		pb@enst.fr


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991012155640.A448>