Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 19:44:15 +0200 From: Harald Schmalzbauer <h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de> To: Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com> Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: intel 82579 nic support? Message-ID: <504A326F.6060709@omnilan.de> In-Reply-To: <CAFOYbcmoTR6EyxJR0KGCCE3Yjodh7jQYezFtM2tuuMCT2mjhrw@mail.gmail.com> References: <50491E26.1010106@omnilan.de> <CAFOYbcmS1jG0e5jxV0GoD7YoV9=OwJxXdY1EO6yZVmAGZm=A%2BA@mail.gmail.com> <5049ECAF.3020709@omnilan.de> <CAFOYbcmoTR6EyxJR0KGCCE3Yjodh7jQYezFtM2tuuMCT2mjhrw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig3203A34FC8FA6B06186E10F4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable schrieb Jack Vogel am 07.09.2012 18:53 (localtime): > OH, now things are clearer, this is a client part, and it is supported > by the em driver, > I don't know why loading igb would have any effect. If you load native > FreeBSD 8.3 or > 9.1 this device should work. > > The only case where you "pass through" a PCI device to a VM guest that > I am familiar > with is using Linux/KVM and SRIOV, meaning you give the guest a VF, > this support is > in the igb and ixgbe drivers. > > This device is in the chipset, so I was told that a) passing it thru > is problematic because > its not really a standalone NIC, and it is probably dependent on > resources in the chipset > that are not being given to the guest, b) there is no real gain with > this hardware doing this, > you can get performance using the normal virtual device connection. > > Bottom line, its possible this could be made to work, but I've not > done it, and its not > something I'm able to support. Great to hear that 82579 is generally supported by em (4), which should be updated by the way. I'm doing the passthrough not for performance resons in this case, but because ESXi5 doesn't iteslf support the 82579. My idea was to make it usable anyway by passing it through to my FreeBSD Guest. Since I've done the same many times for SAS controllers (for performance reasons in that case) successfully with FreeBSD, my idea was not too absurd ;-) But I think I can confirm that you are right and passthrough with chipset-integrated devices is different (for ESXi), since the 82579 passed through to a XP-guest doesn't work either! Thanks, -Harry --------------enig3203A34FC8FA6B06186E10F4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlBKMm8ACgkQLDqVQ9VXb8gPAQCfdlwV9NcnU1h9C+NlHyyWW+5k QzYAoLesV982Gy4gH3Ikrb04CE7df/gN =IXc9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig3203A34FC8FA6B06186E10F4--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?504A326F.6060709>