From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 10 21:59:33 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19A2D16A4CE for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:59:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oberon.aif.ru (oberon.aif.ru [212.15.98.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 688D943D1D for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:59:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from spartak@aif.ru) Received: from oberon.aif.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by oberon.aif.ru (8.12.8p2/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i7ALxVtR043476; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:59:31 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from spartak@oberon.aif.ru) Received: (from spartak@localhost) by oberon.aif.ru (8.12.8p2/8.12.8/Submit) id i7ALxVvf043475; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:59:31 +0400 (MSD) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:59:31 +0400 From: Spartak Radchenko To: "Marc G. Fournier" Message-ID: <20040810215931.GA41092@oberon.aif.ru> References: <20040810173211.V776@ganymede.hub.org> <20040810212443.GA37803@oberon.aif.ru> <20040810184401.V776@ganymede.hub.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040810184401.V776@ganymede.hub.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.3.8 (oberon.aif.ru [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:59:31 +0400 (MSD) X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on oberon.aif.ru cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: em driver worse then fxp driver ... why? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:59:33 -0000 On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 06:44:14PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Wed, 11 Aug 2004, Spartak Radchenko wrote: > > >On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 05:37:28PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > >> > >>I have 5 servers sitting on a Linksys 10/100 switch ... 4 of the 5 are > >>running fxp0 ethernet, while the 5th is running em ... and the 5th > >>performs atrociously: > >> > >>neptune# netstat -ni | head > >>Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts Oerrs > >>Coll > >>em0 1500 00:07:e9:05:1b:2e 36915965 10306 28888840 1 > >>10858513 > > > >I have no problems with em: > > > >>netstat -ni | head > >Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts Oerrs > >Coll > >em0 1500 00:07:e9:05:46:98 1859370761 0 1709686290 0 > >0 > > > >>uname -rs > >FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE-p3 > > Against what type of switch? I don't know :) It's a server on colocation. All I can say - it must be a managed switch because I was told to configure NIC to use 100Mbps full-duplex. However, I have another server with em NIC. This server works with Alcatel OmniStack 6024 (autodetect enabled): Network interface status: Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts Oerrs Coll em0* 1500 00:0e:0c:09:df:e6 0 0 0 0 0 em1 1500 00:0e:0c:09:df:e7 30962103 0 39054512 0 0 -- Spartak Radchenko SVR1-RIPE