Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 22:21:20 +0100 From: Michael =?ISO-8859-1?Q?La=DF?= <bevan@bi-co.net> To: pyunyh@gmail.com Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Gigabit Ethernet performance with Realtek 8111E Message-ID: <1321046480.8512.3.camel@bevan-pc.fritz.box> In-Reply-To: <20111107175953.GA1646@michelle.cdnetworks.com> References: <1320494003.19667.41.camel@bevan-pc.fritz.box> <20111106234054.GB1906@michelle.cdnetworks.com> <20111107175953.GA1646@michelle.cdnetworks.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-7QtFRTJmmcWcU9Q+YJFj Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi! Sorry for my late response. Am Montag, den 07.11.2011, 09:59 -0800 schrieb YongHyeon PYUN: > > > > Some revisions of RealTek controller have FIFO overrun issue but > > I'm not sure whether you're seeing the issue. Try enabling flow > > control and see whether that makes any difference. You can enable > > it by issuing 'ifconfig re0 media flow'. > > This should be read as 'ifconfig re0 mediaopt flow'. It may be that enabling flow control helps a bit but it definately does not solve the problem. There are still hundreds of packets missed in just one or two minutes. Maybe there is no difference at all. > > Show me the dmesg output. RealTek uses the same device PCI ids so it's > > impossible to know which controller you have from the pciconf(8) > > output. I think the relevant part is this one: > re0: <RealTek 8168/8111 B/C/CP/D/DP/E PCIe Gigabit Ethernet> port 0x1000-0x10ff mem 0xf0004000-0xf0004fff,0xf0000000-0xf0003fff irq 16 at device 0.0 on pci1 > re0: Using 1 MSI-X message > re0: Chip rev. 0x2c000000 > re0: MAC rev. 0x00000000 > miibus0: <MII bus> on re0 > rgephy0: <RTL8169S/8110S/8211 1000BASE-T media interface> PHY 1 on miibus0 > rgephy0: none, 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 10baseT-FDX-flow, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, 100baseTX-FDX-flow, 1000baseT, 1000baseT-master, 1000baseT-FDX, 1000baseT-FDX-master, 1000baseT-FDX-flow, 1000baseT-FDX-flow-master, auto, auto-flow > re0: Ethernet address: 38:60:77:3e:af:a5 Full dmesg output is also attached. Greetings, Michael PS: In my first mail I wrote that I can reproduce the problem only with one of two connected hosts. I think the reason is that the other host only produces a maximum of 250Mbit/s while the problematic transfers go up to 550Mbit/s. --=-7QtFRTJmmcWcU9Q+YJFj--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1321046480.8512.3.camel>