On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:41:03AM +0100, Ulrich Sp??rlein wrote: > On Mon, 08.11.2010 at 22:41:12 +0100, Ulrich Sp??rlein wrote: > > On Sun, 07.11.2010 at 15:10:20 -0800, Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 12:24:21PM +0100, Ulrich Sp??rlein wrote: > > > > On Sat, 06.11.2010 at 23:19:33 -0700, Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 2:37 AM, Ulrich Sp??rlein <u...@spoerlein.net> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hello Pyun, > > > > > > > > > > > > On this new server, I cannot get more than ~280kByte/s > > > > > > up/downstream out of > > > > > > re(4) without any tweaking. > > > > > > > > > > > > re0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 > > > > > > mtu 1500 > > > > > > ?? ?? ?? > > > > > > ??options=389b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,WOL_UCAST,WOL_MCAST,WOL_MAGIC> > > > > > > ?? ?? ?? ??ether 00:21:85:63:74:34 > > > > > > ?? ?? ?? ??inet6 fe80::221:85ff:fe63:7434%re0 prefixlen 64 scopeid > > > > > > 0x1 > > > > > > ?? ?? ?? ??inet 46.4.12.147 netmask 0xffffffc0 broadcast 46.4.12.191 > > > > > > ?? ?? ?? ??nd6 options=3<PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV> > > > > > > ?? ?? ?? ??media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <half-duplex>) > > > > > > ?? ?? ?? ??status: active > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems the link was resolved to half-duplex. Does link partner > > > > > also agree on the resolved speed/duplex? > > > > > > > > As this is a dedicated server in a colo hundreds of km away, I have no > > > > means to check this easily. Especially I cannot change the setting from > > > > auto-neg. Btw, linux will show a negotiated 100/full link via mii-tool. > > > > > > > > > > I guess you can contact network administrator of the data center to > > > check the switch configuration. IEEE 802.3 says if link parter use > > > forced full-duplex media and you use auto media, the resolved > > > duplex is half-duplex by definition. I think RealTek may have > > > followed the standard. There is no reason to use manual media > > > configuration unless your link partner is severely broken with > > > auto-negotiation. > > > > > > Due to silicon bug of RealTek PHYs, rgephy(4) always use > > > auto-negotiation so manual media configuration is a kind of > > > auto-negotiation with limited set of available media advertising. > > > I don't know how Linux solve the silicon bug though. One of magic > > > DSP fixups might fix the issue, the DSP fixups vendor released is > > > not under BSD license and does not say more detailed information > > > for the code. > > > > Luckily the provider switch me to another switch that is set to > > autoneg, instead of hardcoded to 100/full. re(4) now happily transfers > > with reasonable speeds, ie. 11MByte/s. > > Alas, spoken too soon. While the throughput is now up to speed, I have > severe problems with packet loss on this device. Again, the linux rescue > system works fine, but under a recent -STABLE (including your latest > MFCs) I get an average packet loss of 10-20%. But it is not constant, > meaning every 5th packet or so, but instead will drop no packets for > minutes-hours and then blackout for 1-5 min straight (these times are > estimates, I haven't used a stop watch or anything.) > > At first, putting the card into promisc mode seemed to alleviate the > issue, but the average ping packet loss during the last 10h was again up > to 10%. Due to the "blackout" nature, this drops all TCP sessions and is > really annoying. > > Do you have any other ideas that I could try? Or should I simply switch > to a different hardware altogether? >
Could you try latest re(4) in HEAD? It has a new feature that displays hardware MAC counters and it contains a couple of PHY access enhancements. You would get the MAC counters on console with "sysctl dev.re.0.stats=1". And let me know how many frames were dropped. _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
