In spite of modules.conf the system boots with the NIC in half duplex. I
verified this with the mii-tool, I can set it full with mii-tool and it
works right (copied a CD image 650MB), and the blade in the switch has
been set either full or auto without gain. Yes, I tried the e100 driver as
well.
Info I think shows this attached to prevent munging, let me know if more
is needed.
Bill Davidsen wrote:
> In spite of modules.conf the system boots with the NIC in half duplex. I
> verified this with the mii-tool, I can set it full with mii-tool and it
> works right (copied a CD image 650MB), and the blade in the switch has
> been set either full or auto without gain. Yes, I tried the e100 driver as
> well.
>
> Info I think shows this attached to prevent munging, let me know if more
> is needed.
Lots of feedback/questions/response:
When you're on a network, more is always needed :)
Please give _plenty_ of details about what is on the other side of the
cable: hub? switch? vendor of hub/switch? crossover to another NIC?
what is the port configuration and what are the capabilities of the
other end? is it set to autonegotiate (on the other end)?
Why do you force full duplex? It is often the wrong thing to do.
For eepro100, you should use module option 'options' to specify
10baseT-FD... full_duplex appears to be somewhat redundant in the
context of your problem.
For e100, you should use 'e100_speed_duplex' module option to specify media.
Finally, I would be very interested to know the results of using ethtool
to set, and get, your media settings. It's in every distro these days,
plus you can d/l it from http://sf.net/projects/gkernel/
Jeff
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > In spite of modules.conf the system boots with the NIC in half duplex. I
> > verified this with the mii-tool, I can set it full with mii-tool and it
> > works right (copied a CD image 650MB), and the blade in the switch has
> > been set either full or auto without gain. Yes, I tried the e100 driver as
> > well.
> >
> > Info I think shows this attached to prevent munging, let me know if more
> > is needed.
>
>
> Lots of feedback/questions/response:
>
> When you're on a network, more is always needed :)
>
> Please give _plenty_ of details about what is on the other side of the
> cable: hub? switch? vendor of hub/switch? crossover to another NIC?
> what is the port configuration and what are the capabilities of the
> other end? is it set to autonegotiate (on the other end)?
Cisco 5509 set auto.
>
> Why do you force full duplex? It is often the wrong thing to do.
It gives about 4x throughput...
The network folks say they have the same problem with most NICs and OS, so
they have to teach Windows users to diddle the NIC. At least I came to
them with the workaround. It's possible a known problem with those 10baseT
blades.
>
> For eepro100, you should use module option 'options' to specify
> 10baseT-FD... full_duplex appears to be somewhat redundant in the
> context of your problem.
Okay, I assumed that since a grep showed:
MODULE_PARM(full_duplex, "1-" __MODULE_STRING(8) "i");
that the option was supported. What does it do, if I need to diddle bits
in the options?
> For e100, you should use 'e100_speed_duplex' module option to specify media.
>
> Finally, I would be very interested to know the results of using ethtool
> to set, and get, your media settings. It's in every distro these days,
> plus you can d/l it from http://sf.net/projects/gkernel/
Well, it's not installed at any rate, so I'll have to download it. Timing
uncertain, I'm "off" for the next five days and leaving the site for home
shortly because I have a 131 mile commute and heavy snow. Perhaps from
home tonight.
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
Hello Bill , Severly clipped original message .
If that 5509 is running slightly older code (and maybe even
newer) there is(was?) a difficulty with auto-negotiation between
the cisco & many adapters . This btw is(was?) a known issue with
cisco . Also the last item I had concerning the matter , cisco
recommeded static duplex & rate settings . Hth , JimL
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Bill Davidsen wrote:
...
> > Please give _plenty_ of details about what is on the other side of the
> > cable: hub? switch? vendor of hub/switch? crossover to another NIC?
> > what is the port configuration and what are the capabilities of the
> > other end? is it set to autonegotiate (on the other end)?
>
> Cisco 5509 set auto.
> >
> > Why do you force full duplex? It is often the wrong thing to do.
>
> It gives about 4x throughput...
...
--
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS |
| Network Engineer | P.O. Box 854 | Give me Linux |
| [email protected] | Coudersport PA 16915 | only on AXP |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
>
> Hello Bill , Severly clipped original message .
> If that 5509 is running slightly older code (and maybe even
> newer) there is(was?) a difficulty with auto-negotiation between
> the cisco & many adapters . This btw is(was?) a known issue with
> cisco . Also the last item I had concerning the matter , cisco
> recommeded static duplex & rate settings . Hth , JimL
Yeah, I was really trying that;-) I'm working for the moment, there's a
6500 waiting to be deployed, so no effort will go into upgrading the old
machine.
Thanks for the note, I'm not clear why full_duplex doesn't work, but I
have it working now and hopefully the new router will be better.
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.