On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 17:48:04 -0800, Auke Kok wrote: > Sami Farin wrote: > >On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 15:59:30 -0800, Auke Kok wrote: > >>Sami Farin wrote: > >... > >>>I do "ethtool -K eth0 tso off" now and check if I get the hang again. =) > >>I'm unsure whether v7.2.x already automatically disables TSO for 100mbit > >>speed link, probably not. It should. > > > >It disabled it but I enabled it just for fun. > > > >>Please try our updated driver from http://e1000.sf.net/ (7.3.20) against > >>the same kernel. There are some changes with regard to the ich8/TSO > >>driver that might affect this, so re-testing is worth it for us. > > > >I now run 7.3.20-NAPI. > > > >BTW. the Makefile is buggy: it does not get CC from kernel's Makefile. > >Using wrong compiler can cause for example a reboot when loading the > >module. > >(At least that's what happened with gcc-2.95.3 vs 3.x.x some years ago...) > > I'll look into that, do you have any suggestions?
loop-AES has some hacks which figure out the correct CC http://heanet.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/loop-aes/loop-AES-v3.1e.tar.bz2 > >>also, please always include the full dmesg output. Feel free to CC > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] on this. > > > >I enabled TSO again. I write again if TSO causes problems. > > There are known problems with that configuration, that's why the newer > drivers disable TSO for 10/100 speeds. > > do you really think that you can see the performance gain fro musing TSO at No. I was thinking that if TSO does not work at 100, why 1000 would be any better. But I can't test at 1000 speeds right now. But if you say driver is supposed to hang at 100 speed, I believe you. Ohh... that was fast. 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303056500 <3>e1000: eth0: e1000_clean_tx_irq: Detected Tx Unit Hang 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303081500 <4> Tx Queue <0> 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303082500 <4> TDH <48> 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303083500 <4> TDT <fa> 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303084500 <4> next_to_use <fa> 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303085500 <4> next_to_clean <48> 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303086500 <4>buffer_info[next_to_clean] 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303087500 <4> time_stamp <9e332d8> 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303088500 <4> next_to_watch <49> 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303088500 <4> jiffies <9e336df> 2007-01-10 04:07:42.303094500 <4> next_to_watch.status <0> 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302826500 <3>e1000: eth0: e1000_clean_tx_irq: Detected Tx Unit Hang 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302850500 <4> Tx Queue <0> 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302851500 <4> TDH <48> 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302852500 <4> TDT <34> 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302853500 <4> next_to_use <34> 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302854500 <4> next_to_clean <48> 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302855500 <4>buffer_info[next_to_clean] 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302855500 <4> time_stamp <9e332d8> 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302856500 <4> next_to_watch <49> 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302857500 <4> jiffies <9e33ac7> 2007-01-10 04:07:43.302862500 <4> next_to_watch.status <0> ... > those speeds anyway? we don't ;). In any case you should keep TSO off for > 10/100 speeds. ... > >PS. please do not delete Mail-Followup-To header field. > > I hit "reply-all" and I have no control over which field thunderbird I hit list-reply. > removes or adds. I have to manually add your e-mail address too? No. > Maybe your mail client is broken instead? No. > Don't you want to receive replies? Yes. I am subscribed to the mailing list. That's why my email was not in Mail-Followup-To. But if your thunderbird does not support Mail-Followup-To, just ignore it. I can add the header field manually. -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/