Re: [E1000-devel] 1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 01:59:32AM -0400, Robin Humble wrote: > On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 06:31:51AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > >On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 11:20:09PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> >lspci -v shows the message below, and I am moving files between syste

Re: [E1000-devel] 1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Robin Humble
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 06:31:51AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: >On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 11:20:09PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >lspci -v shows the message below, and I am moving files between systems, >> >{from RAMdisk to RAMdisk} on idle machines. >> >The transfer r

Re: 1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 11:20:09PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >lspci -v shows the message below, and I am moving files between systems, > >{from RAMdisk to RAMdisk} on idle machines. > >The transfer rate is concurrent with just under the max throughput > >capable on a

Re: 1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Robert Hancock
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: lspci -v shows the message below, and I am moving files between systems, {from RAMdisk to RAMdisk} on idle machines. The transfer rate is concurrent with just under the max throughput capable on a 64-bit/66Mhz PCI socket. I think you miscalculate, that bus can transfer

RE: 1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Greg.Chandler
. -Original Message- From: Kok, Auke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 10:40 PM To: Chandler, Greg Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 1000xf bus problem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > If you mean dmesg it says t

Re: 1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Kok, Auke
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you mean dmesg it says this: e1000: :0d:02.0: e1000_probe: (PCI-X:100MHz:64-bit) {macaddress} That's weird... dmesg shows one thing, lspci shows another, and my data transfers seem to point to the lspci info... Any idea which I should trust? Both, the e1000 d

RE: 1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Greg.Chandler
Auke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 3:52 PM To: Robert Hancock Cc: Chandler, Greg; linux-kernel; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 1000xf bus problem Robert Hancock wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I'm running a e1000xf adapter in a 64-bit/100Mhz PCI slot.

RE: 1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Greg.Chandler
] Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 2:41 PM To: Chandler, Greg; linux-kernel Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 1000xf bus problem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm running a e1000xf adapter in a 64-bit/100Mhz PCI slot. The intel > site shows this is a supported config for the card, b

Re: 1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Kok, Auke
Robert Hancock wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm running a e1000xf adapter in a 64-bit/100Mhz PCI slot. The intel site shows this is a supported config for the card, but linux is pulling this info: ed:02.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82544EI Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Fiber) (re

Re: 1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Robert Hancock
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm running a e1000xf adapter in a 64-bit/100Mhz PCI slot. The intel site shows this is a supported config for the card, but linux is pulling this info: ed:02.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82544EI Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Fiber) (rev 02) Subsystem

1000xf bus problem

2007-03-18 Thread Greg.Chandler
I'm running a e1000xf adapter in a 64-bit/100Mhz PCI slot. The intel site shows this is a supported config for the card, but linux is pulling this info: ed:02.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82544EI Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Fiber) (rev 02) Subsystem: Intel Corporation PRO/10