Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-02-08 Thread Marius Strobl
On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 02:24:42PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > On 2/8/2016 4:10 AM, Marius Strobl wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 07:46:02PM -0500, mike tancsa wrote: > >> Sure, I will try Monday when at the office > > > > Actually, thinking about it, could you please try the following > > patc

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-02-08 Thread Mike Tancsa
On 2/8/2016 4:10 AM, Marius Strobl wrote: > On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 07:46:02PM -0500, mike tancsa wrote: >> Sure, I will try Monday when at the office > > Actually, thinking about it, could you please try the following > patch on top of the previous one/r295287? > https://people.freebsd.org/~mariu

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-02-08 Thread Marius Strobl
On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 07:46:02PM -0500, mike tancsa wrote: > Sure, I will try Monday when at the office Actually, thinking about it, could you please try the following patch on top of the previous one/r295287? https://people.freebsd.org/~marius/e1000_max_scatter_tso_10.diff Thanks Marius _

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-02-06 Thread Marius Strobl
On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 09:49:59AM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > On 1/30/2016 12:26 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 11:47:19AM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > >> On 1/29/2016 8:23 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 03:41:57PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > >>>

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-02-03 Thread Mike Tancsa
On 2/1/2016 5:27 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 05:11:29PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: >> On 1/30/2016 12:26 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: >>> >>> Ah, okay, that at least makes sense. Can you please verify that with >>> the attached patch applied, you have a setup that works out of the

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-02-02 Thread Mike Tancsa
On 1/30/2016 12:26 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 11:47:19AM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: >> On 1/29/2016 8:23 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 03:41:57PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: No multi queue. Stock GENERIC kernel with a couple of things removed. >

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-02-01 Thread Mike Tancsa
On 2/1/2016 5:27 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 05:11:29PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: >> On 1/30/2016 12:26 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: >>> >>> Ah, okay, that at least makes sense. Can you please verify that with >>> the attached patch applied, you have a setup that works out of the

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-02-01 Thread Marius Strobl
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 05:11:29PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > On 1/30/2016 12:26 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > > > > Ah, okay, that at least makes sense. Can you please verify that with > > the attached patch applied, you have a setup that works out of the > > box? > > > Hi, > The patch does not ap

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-02-01 Thread Mike Tancsa
On 1/30/2016 12:26 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > > Ah, okay, that at least makes sense. Can you please verify that with > the attached patch applied, you have a setup that works out of the > box? > Hi, The patch does not apply cleanly # patch < em_tso_gig_only_10.diff Hmm... Looks like a unified

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-01-30 Thread mike tancsa
Thanks, I will apply and try it early Monday morning ! On January 30, 2016 12:26:31 PM Marius Strobl wrote: On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 11:47:19AM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: On 1/29/2016 8:23 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 03:41:57PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: >> >> No multi

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-01-30 Thread Marius Strobl
On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 11:47:19AM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > On 1/29/2016 8:23 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 03:41:57PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > >> > >> No multi queue. Stock GENERIC kernel with a couple of things removed. > >> hw.em are just the defaults. I will try wit

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-01-30 Thread Mike Tancsa
On 1/29/2016 8:23 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 03:41:57PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: >> >> No multi queue. Stock GENERIC kernel with a couple of things removed. >> hw.em are just the defaults. I will try without TSO >> >> % ifconfig em0 >> em0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500 >> >

Re: possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-01-29 Thread Marius Strobl
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 03:41:57PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > No multi queue. Stock GENERIC kernel with a couple of things removed. > hw.em are just the defaults. I will try without TSO > > % ifconfig em0 > em0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500 > > options=4209b > Hrm, that's strange, TSO4 shou

possible em regression (was Re: svn commit: r294958 - in stable/10: share/man/man4 sys/dev/e1000 sys/dev/ixgb sys/dev/netmap)

2016-01-29 Thread Mike Tancsa
On 1/29/2016 1:42 PM, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote: >> # pciconf -lBvcb em0 >> em0@pci0:13:0:0:class=0x02 card=0x108c15d9 chip=0x108c8086 >> rev=0x03 hdr=0x00 >> vendor = 'Intel Corporation' >> device = '82573E Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Copper)' > > I guess you haven't c