I upgraded from 2.4.22 to 2.6.5 (to test HPT374' support, which BTW, works
fine).
However, I'm having serious network issues now. The NIC is a 3com 3c905B.
ifconfig shows this:
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:03:27:81:75
inet addr:192.168.20.1 Bcast:192.168.20.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:11241 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:9739 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:9732
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:2994485 (2.8 Mb) TX bytes:835146 (815.5 Kb)
Interrupt:9 Base address:0xd800
Note that for TX packets, the carrier number is almost the same as the total
packets.... booting in 2.4.22, there are zero problems. The only difference
in the ifconfig, other than that, is that in 2.4.22, I have "RUNNING" in the
options (but I didn't find how to force that).
I read the docs and tried forcing full_duplex, etc, with no success.
BTW, that NIC is connected to a 10/100 switch, nothing fancy.
On Monday 05 April 2004 14:21, Carlos Fernandez Sanz wrote:
> I upgraded from 2.4.22 to 2.6.5 (to test HPT374' support, which BTW, works
> fine).
>
> However, I'm having serious network issues now. The NIC is a 3com 3c905B.
> ifconfig shows this:
>
> eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:03:27:81:75
> inet addr:192.168.20.1 Bcast:192.168.20.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
> UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> RX packets:11241 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> TX packets:9739 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:9732
> collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
> RX bytes:2994485 (2.8 Mb) TX bytes:835146 (815.5 Kb)
> Interrupt:9 Base address:0xd800
>
> Note that for TX packets, the carrier number is almost the same as the
> total packets.... booting in 2.4.22, there are zero problems. The only
> difference in the ifconfig, other than that, is that in 2.4.22, I have
> "RUNNING" in the options (but I didn't find how to force that).
Hm. Thats strange. Your interface is not UP. It's not supposed to
do any tx/rx at all. Try to up it. If it does not work,
strace 'ifconfig eth0 up' under both kernels and compare.
--
vda
>
> eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:03:27:81:75
> inet addr:192.168.20.1 Bcast:192.168.20.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
> UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
Hm. Thats strange. Your interface is not UP. It's not supposed to
do any tx/rx at all. Try to up it. If it does not work,
strace 'ifconfig eth0 up' under both kernels and compare.
It is UP (of course) :-)
Only "RUNNING" is missing, comparing 2.4 to 2.6. Other than that, both
ifconfig output are identical (and those 'carrier' counts, obviously).
The thing is, the more I research the more it looks like a local problem, as
I don't find a lot of references in google, and those who are enjoying the
same problem are as clueless as I am.
In article <002101c41b00$3f0f8c30$1530a8c0@HUSH>,
Carlos Fernandez Sanz <[email protected]> wrote:
>I upgraded from 2.4.22 to 2.6.5 (to test HPT374' support, which BTW, works
>fine).
>
>However, I'm having serious network issues now. The NIC is a 3com 3c905B.
>ifconfig shows this:
>
>eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:03:27:81:75
> inet addr:192.168.20.1 Bcast:192.168.20.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
> UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> RX packets:11241 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> TX packets:9739 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:9732
> collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
> RX bytes:2994485 (2.8 Mb) TX bytes:835146 (815.5 Kb)
> Interrupt:9 Base address:0xd800
>
>Note that for TX packets, the carrier number is almost the same as the total
>packets.... booting in 2.4.22, there are zero problems. The only difference
>in the ifconfig, other than that, is that in 2.4.22, I have "RUNNING" in the
>options (but I didn't find how to force that).
Have you tried upgrading your 'ifconfig' ?
Mike.
> >Note that for TX packets, the carrier number is almost the same as the
total
> >packets.... booting in 2.4.22, there are zero problems. The only
difference
> >in the ifconfig, other than that, is that in 2.4.22, I have "RUNNING" in
the
> >options (but I didn't find how to force that).
>
> Have you tried upgrading your 'ifconfig' ?
net-tools 1.60
ifconfig 1.42 (2001-04-13)
Didn't find a newer one, but still, the problem's cause gotta be somewhere
else.
Or not?