Pavel Machek wrote: > On Thu 2008-02-07 14:32:16, Kok, Auke wrote: >> Pavel Machek wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>>>> I have the famous e1000 latency problems: >>>>> >>>>> 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=68 ttl=56 time=351.9 ms >>>>> 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=69 ttl=56 time=209.2 ms >>>>> 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=70 ttl=56 time=1004.1 ms >>>>> 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=71 ttl=56 time=308.9 ms >>>>> 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=72 ttl=56 time=305.4 ms >>>>> 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=73 ttl=56 time=9.8 ms >>>>> 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=74 ttl=56 time=3.7 ms >>>>> >>>>> ...and they are still there in 2.6.25-git0. I had ethernet EEPROM >>>>> checksum problems, which I fixed by the update, but problems are not >>>>> gone. >>>> pavel, start using "e1000e" instead - this driver replaces e1000 for all >>>> the >>>> pci-express devices and has the infamous L1 ASPM disable patch to >>>> fix this issue. >>> Ok, e1000e seems to work for me. >>> >>> In another email, you asked for lspci -vvvv of failing e1000 >>> case. Should I still provide it? >> well, if you do it you should see that L1 ASPM is now disabled (with e1000e) >> whereas with e1000 it is still enabled. That's the fix that you need... > > Is there easy way to push that fix to e1000, too? Or print "use e1000e > instead" and refuse to load?
well we're going to delete all pci-e related code from this driver soon anyway, but I am indeed writing a patch right now that prints out this warning... Auke -- 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/