From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Tue Jan 17 20:03:57 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27E4DCB507E for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 20:03:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yaneurabeya@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pf0-x229.google.com (mail-pf0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F084B173D; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 20:03:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yaneurabeya@gmail.com) Received: by mail-pf0-x229.google.com with SMTP id f144so64333581pfa.2; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 12:03:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=fZXJvph+9++zKoVg+3kaDHepVwaP7I60mQraFSWe9ho=; b=oUIjZOQEQNx7KC+6YYE2xnl0AhSSfzsLZhz00ITX1LA8eOWQrknz4YcWJHGUDWeTSr tM/XjZ8vafvBSNZipR++dUAUgQS8lY3UaKP3HNsgfeVzip7pDZqH1lmDUeD23EC21w9e OoYI4lQz01RyDhZnNA5dAQdgKm+HeP5AtNS8VprwXBVA2dg2FaGkTnKXGyEZUN8CzhXa wEHDIasevPdrH33pH43FGeh93yZ89N26nb7yeElX4kMUiiuyPeV8Wrwc8LwKss+ebPQI AhDlybdV2PGvOCHgRVF2D6ipqmJoRo/BGs/hd3hPQNeaYuyI90ED54UTqgMASsuVySak E+6A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=fZXJvph+9++zKoVg+3kaDHepVwaP7I60mQraFSWe9ho=; b=IUwi/d7XsLl3l1w8RR5TVodgieyS7NVQ5EhETG+1uNd+ISx58jC/2dcNgAuiED80hg ebUSQXQt3+ZMebLecXsGqUde+7TGqAnJm8giF/D4YlHnR1Z/AhLZaDiUC4dLIzxwP2m+ kjL6Q6TZskAhHGw5TTqKSpdaq2mJbKx53zoeTzYENnoEElWwLg+lHYhGZywVUVzNquKm 0G5d7daxfVsdhmp/hdeihV/CtRXOQ7wClV1mXrneeTQi/o4qW1WuQHQvRZyqgmf2ssec nv1OFOEvqzlTXomCMdsdI3jFJcnHhLJ0lVqD3uhE3d4atJYIGnWvDqKkcN97IfDSUagZ f1Lw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXL8KKZuDLARrJhMuYKYGkecOliOFCyqYXnnma9yknQpCBMbuvdayDqYeIN9cStJsA== X-Received: by 10.99.229.17 with SMTP id r17mr3618094pgh.81.1484683436582; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 12:03:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.20.13] (c-73-19-52-228.hsd1.wa.comcast.net. [73.19.52.228]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i10sm58098523pgd.37.2017.01.17.12.03.55 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Jan 2017 12:03:55 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: r312348: igb broken: reporting wrong linkspeed! From: Ngie Cooper X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14C92) In-Reply-To: <20170117205455.333206db@hermann> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 12:03:55 -0800 Cc: FreeBSD CURRENT , Sean Bruno Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20170117205455.333206db@hermann> To: "Hartmann, O." X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 20:03:57 -0000 > On Jan 17, 2017, at 11:54, Hartmann, O. wrote: >=20 > 12-CURRENT (FreeBSD 12.0-CURRENT #74 r312348: Tue Jan 17 19:54:58 CET > 2017 am64) reports the wrong linkspeed on a dualport Intel i350 NIC: >=20 > igb0: flags=3D8843 metric 0 mtu > 1500 > options=3D653dbb > ether xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx inet 192.168.0.111 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast > 192.168.0.255 nd6 options=3D29 > media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX ) > status: active >=20 > The swith the NIC is connected to reports 1 GBit. I checked with two > switches, FreeBSD reports bullshit on that subject. >=20 > I also realised severe problems of this Intel i350 dual NIC cards with > FreeBSD (we use this NIC type as a standard and so we have plenty, all > with the same issue). When the NIC negotiates its linkspeed, it very > often fall back to 100 MBit. This behaviour is not predictable, but it > occurs with a SoHo smart managed Netgear GS110TBv2 and some of our > Cisco Catalyst switches at work (some 35XX and 29XX, I do not know the > exact type). Hi, One of the workarounds for igb wasn't ported to the new driver--I rememb= er an issue like this being solved sometime in the 2015-2016 timeframe (I'm l= eaning towards 2016). Thanks, -Ngie=