Piotr Jasiukajtis writes: > On 7/17/08, Rao Shoaib <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > e1000g is a generic driver for lots of intel chipsets. As we are learning > > in the performance work not all of them behave the same, in case of e1000g > > you really have to look at the chipset to make any comparison. > This is my NIC (Lenovo T61): > > Jul 19 20:57:35 nx0 pcplusmp: [ID 803547 kern.info] pcplusmp: > pci8086,1049 (e1000g) instance 0 vector 0x18 ioapic 0xff intin 0xff is > bound to cpu 1 > Jul 19 20:57:35 nx0 mac: [ID 469746 kern.info] NOTICE: e1000g0 registered > Jul 19 20:57:35 nx0 e1000g: [ID 766679 kern.info] Intel(R) PRO/1000 > Network Connection, Driver Ver. 5.2.9 > Jul 19 20:57:37 nx0 mac: [ID 435574 kern.info] NOTICE: e1000g0 link > up, 1000 Mbps, full duplex
My home system (which seems to work well and is running snv_92) reports this driver as: Jun 27 08:51:16 carlson pcplusmp: [ID 803547 kern.info] pcplusmp: pci8086,1079 (e1000g) instance 1 vector 0x1b ioapic 0x2 intin 0x3 is bound to cpu 0 Jun 27 08:51:16 carlson e1000g: [ID 766679 kern.info] Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection, Driver Ver. 5.2.8 Jun 27 08:51:18 carlson mac: [ID 435574 kern.info] NOTICE: e1000g1 link up, 100 Mbps, half duplex The differences here include the PCI IDs (I have 10bd and 1079, you have 1049), the driver version (!), and the fact that I've got some really, really old hubs. ;-} On the driver version number, something strange is afoot. Looking at the source versioning in the gate, 5.2.9 corresponds with CR 6713685, which integrated in snv_93. Are you sure you're running snv_91? In any event, both the different chipset and the type of interface could make a difference here. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
