Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763775AbYBGXRO (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 18:17:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758844AbYBGXQ5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 18:16:57 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:44069 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757620AbYBGXQ4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 18:16:56 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,318,1199692800"; d="scan'208";a="296694738" Message-ID: <47AB9077.9000007@intel.com> Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 15:12:55 -0800 From: "Kok, Auke" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071125) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pavel Machek CC: "Kok, Auke" , kernel list , e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, john.ronciak@intel.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] e1000 1sec latency problem References: <20080207141718.GA2030@elf.ucw.cz> <47AB4B2E.1030801@intel.com> <20080207222411.GA1917@elf.ucw.cz> <47AB86F0.9060601@intel.com> <20080207223709.GC6096@elf.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20080207223709.GC6096@elf.ucw.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1786 Lines: 40 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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/