Hi Jay,

Thanks for writing back regarding this matter.  We use latest 2.4 kernel
from kernel.org. For E1000 driver,
we download it from Intel web site.  If you have newer driver somewhere we
can download. We will download that
and give it a try.

Basically in our setup, both 82546 NIC based setup and 82573 based setup
using the same os and same kernel,
bonding configuration. the only difference in software is the driver: E1000E
vs. E1000. E1000E driver
working well, E1000 does not.  We also plan to test igb driver bonding for
the newest Intel NIC chip.

Thanks for your help!
Wayne

-----Original Message-----
From: Jay Vosburgh [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 12:44 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: 'Ronciak, John'; [email protected]
Subject: [work] Re: [E1000-devel] Bug report E1000 driver bonding in 802.3ad
mode can not go beyond 1GB/s throughput

Support Team <[email protected]> wrote:

>Yes, same VLAN setup in the software does not work for 82546 chip.  The
>setup in software are identical,
>other than 82546 load E1000 driver and 82573 load E1000E driver, nothing
>else changed in software or
>test environment.  If we can see 82546/MT adapter can get 2GB/s in bond
>mode, we will be happy.

        Some bonding things to check:

ip route show

        Make sure no interfaces (the slaves) have routes that supercede
the route for the bond itself.

cat /proc/net/bonding/bond0     [or whatever bond device you have]

        Make sure the options you think you have match what bonding is
seeing (particularly the xmit_hash_policy if your throughput test is
many connections but not many discrete peers).

        Also in the proc file, make sure the 802.3ad is aggregating
properly; are all of the slaves in the active aggregator?

        Lastly, what distro (cat /etc/issue) and kernel version are you
running (uname -a)?

        I fixed a bug in 802.3ad related to aggregator assignments a
couple of weeks ago.  If you've got a sufficiently recent kernel (the
bug was introduced late last year), you might be seeing that (if the
slaves don't aggregate properly).  I observed the bug messing up 802.3ad
aggregations with my e1000 devices, so it might be that.

        -J

---
        -Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, [email protected]



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel

Reply via email to