From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 25 00:35:54 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5586A16A4CE for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 00:35:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ppp162-47.static.internode.on.net (ppp162-47.static.internode.on.net [150.101.162.47]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFA7943D2F for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 00:35:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from emikulic@dmr.ath.cx) Received: by ppp162-47.static.internode.on.net (Poofix, from userid 1001) id 844F560D1; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:35:51 +1100 (EST) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:35:51 +1100 From: Emil Mikulic To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20050225003551.GA4122@dmr.ath.cx> Mail-Followup-To: Emil Mikulic , freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <421DEB5D.9090703@alumni.rice.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <421DEB5D.9090703@alumni.rice.edu> X-PGP-ID: 1024D/344A699F X-PGP-Fingerprint: EE97 2C84 6D07 E76C F075 C0BA ED2A 9319 344A 699F X-Written-On: dmr.ath.cx (FreeBSD 6.0-CURRENT i386) User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i Subject: Re: panic: Duplicate free of item 0xc2580a00 from zone 0xc103e9a0(Mbuf) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 00:35:54 -0000 On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 08:57:33AM -0600, Jon Noack wrote: > From src/sys/pci/if_rl.c: > "The RealTek 8139 PCI NIC redefines the meaning of 'low end.' This is > probably the worst PCI ethernet controller ever made, with the possible > exception of the FEAST chip made by SMC. The 8139 supports bus-master > DMA, but it has a terrible interface that nullifies any performance > gains that bus-master DMA usually offers. > ..." > > I would bet that (in)famous comment coupled with everyone recommending > fxp or em adapters[1] causes most who experience problems to abandon rl > adapters at the first hint of trouble. A few weeks ago I was copying a large file from a machine with an rl interface to a machine with an fxp one. Both were running 6-CURRENT with almost identical kernel configs. top showed the rl irq was eating 20% of the CPU time of a 1050MHz K7. On the other end, the fxp irq was eating 1% of a 400MHz Pentium II. > [1] I use fxp and em adapters and I've never had a problem with them. > As such, I can't argue with the recommendation. Seconded. --Emil