DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=kpiTrnpw4Isf5r5YGBoDgK0iNlr9V5DwjtZJAeyB71Vo53guH1MsjrOmsNoeQee2i1
         LXheSUPdFp83ItywY304HSVvTCJI03cMmOpiSrlhzJmabt4UnWN7Q0dX09cM5hqzF6gI
         Al6UbvY0ZyX66kGlcUm1auAF0SVrX9nbxYwHw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20091204090524.GB6478@ff.dom.local>
References: <81bfc67a0911232217n41b9ac02w3b7770b789e5d209@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091124111946.GA7883@ff.dom.local>
	 <81bfc67a0911250606k1ec76354n217da9ca20b3517c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091125191105.GA3167@ami.dom.local>
	 <81bfc67a0911271007o1fb8f8c2vdd36e8585280e4da@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091127213640.GA2611@ami.dom.local>
	 <81bfc67a0911271435g4106652bpe8c9ea07893d0ebd@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091127224206.GA3350@ami.dom.local>
	 <81bfc67a0912031749y15faed66s9c8a924684c97a19@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091204090524.GB6478@ff.dom.local>
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 13:28:26 -0500
Message-ID: <81bfc67a0912041028w16668d0cx4da04bee989eef4a@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: large packet loss take2 2.6.31.x
From: Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com>
To: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com>
Cc: Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
       Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>,
       Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
       e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1831
Lines: 42

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:05 AM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 08:49:17PM -0500, Caleb Cushing wrote:
>> >
>> > modprobe -r e1000e
>> > modprobe e1000e IntMode=0
>> >
>> > Jarek P.
>> >
>> tested on kernel behaving properly no change. what do these modes do?
>
> e1000e by default uses MSI-X interrupts if possible, which are most
> modern. If there are some problems IntMode lets us try older types,
> so I rather meant it for the misbehaving kernel.
>
>>
>> I've installed a 10/100 linksys nic into my system. it appears to be
>> working fine on a bad kernel (2.6.32-final tested and for sure
>> verified). I've only tested it once though. my laptop died so direct
>> connection between that won't work. can I test between these 2 nics?
>> (suppose no real reason why not) but what should I proceed with at
>> this point?
>
> If you have it fixed easily with another nic you should first
> reconsider if this debugging is worth of your time. Of course it's
> could be very useful for the kernel (unless it's a hardware fault),
> but on the other hand this is a popular nic, tested by many people.

trying to figure out if it's hardware, I wish I'd figured that out a
month ago because dell would have been shipping me a new mobo at that
point... oh well... I'm starting to think it is but given the age of
the computer... (just over 1 year now) I'm not happy about that. my
nic is a 10/100 card the e1000e is obviously gigabit though I don't
think I've a need (or network) for the gigabit atm
-- 
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
--
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/