Hi Florian,
On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 7:57 PM Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
> On 08/13/2018 08:58 AM, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > Hi Andrew/Florain,
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 2:38 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
> >>
> I agree, this should be padding packets correctly, can you still
> instrument c
On 08/13/2018 08:58 AM, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> Hi Andrew/Florain,
>
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 2:38 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>
I agree, this should be padding packets correctly, can you still
instrument cpsw to make sure that what comes to its ndo_start_xmit() is
ETH_ZLEN + tag_len o
Hi Andrew/Florain,
On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 2:38 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> > > I agree, this should be padding packets correctly, can you still
> > > instrument cpsw to make sure that what comes to its ndo_start_xmit() is
> > > ETH_ZLEN + tag_len or more?
> > >
> > Yes I can confirm the skb->len i
> > I agree, this should be padding packets correctly, can you still
> > instrument cpsw to make sure that what comes to its ndo_start_xmit() is
> > ETH_ZLEN + tag_len or more?
> >
> Yes I can confirm the skb->len is always >= 62 (ETH_ZLEN + 2)
Which switch are you using?
Marvell switches use eit
Hi Florian,
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 6:36 PM Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
> On 08/10/2018 04:26 AM, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 6:23 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
> >>
> >>> Its coming from the switch lan4 I have attached the png, where
> >>> C4:F3:12:08:FE:7F is
> >>
On 08/10/2018 04:26 AM, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 6:23 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>
>>> Its coming from the switch lan4 I have attached the png, where
>>> C4:F3:12:08:FE:7F is
>>> the mac of lan4, which is broadcast to ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, which is
>>> causing rx cou
Hi Andrew,
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 6:23 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> > Its coming from the switch lan4 I have attached the png, where
> > C4:F3:12:08:FE:7F is
> > the mac of lan4, which is broadcast to ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, which is
> > causing rx counter on
> > PC to go up.
>
> So, big packets are maki
> Its coming from the switch lan4 I have attached the png, where
> C4:F3:12:08:FE:7F is
> the mac of lan4, which is broadcast to ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, which is
> causing rx counter on
> PC to go up.
So, big packets are making it from the switch to the PC. But the small
ARP packets are not.
This is w
> > > The received packets captured on the PC are MDNS and DHPC, these MDNS
> > > are causing the rx
> > > packet counter go up:
> >
> > And where are these packets coming from? The target device? Or some
> > other device on your network?
> >
> AFIK, MDNS is also kind of a bcast its sending MDNS re
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:56 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 01:45:52PM +0100, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:02 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 12:31:31PM +0100, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > > > Hi Andrew,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, A
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 01:45:52PM +0100, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:02 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 12:31:31PM +0100, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > > Hi Andrew,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:05 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I dont see a
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:02 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 12:31:31PM +0100, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:05 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > >
> > > > I dont see any Reply's on the PC with tcpdump on PC
> > >
> > > So try ethool -S on the PC.
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 12:33:30PM +0100, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> Hi Florain,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:24 PM Florian Fainelli wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 08/02/2018 09:05 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > >> I dont see any Reply's on the PC with tcpdump on PC
> > >
> > > So
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 12:31:31PM +0100, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:05 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
> >
> > > I dont see any Reply's on the PC with tcpdump on PC
> >
> > So try ethool -S on the PC. Any packets dropped because of errors?
> >
> I dont see any drops/er
Hi Florain,
Thanks for your reply.
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:24 PM Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
>
>
> On 08/02/2018 09:05 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> >> I dont see any Reply's on the PC with tcpdump on PC
> >
> > So try ethool -S on the PC. Any packets dropped because of errors?
> >
> > Try turning off
Hi Andrew,
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:05 PM Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> > I dont see any Reply's on the PC with tcpdump on PC
>
> So try ethool -S on the PC. Any packets dropped because of errors?
>
I dont see any drops/errors on the PC, following is the dump from PC:
sudo ethtool -S enx00e04c68c229
[s
On 08/02/2018 09:05 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> I dont see any Reply's on the PC with tcpdump on PC
>
> So try ethool -S on the PC. Any packets dropped because of errors?
>
> Try turning off hardware checksums on the switch. ethtool -K.
Also make sure that cpsw is properly sending 64 bytes (inc
> I dont see any Reply's on the PC with tcpdump on PC
So try ethool -S on the PC. Any packets dropped because of errors?
Try turning off hardware checksums on the switch. ethtool -K.
Andrew
Hi Andrew,
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> I have PC connected to lan4(ip = 169.254..126.126) and the PC ip is
>> 169.254.78.251,
>> but when I ping from PC to lan4 I get Destination Host Unreachable,
>> but where as I can see
>> that in the tcpdump log for lan4 it does repl
> I have PC connected to lan4(ip = 169.254..126.126) and the PC ip is
> 169.254.78.251,
> but when I ping from PC to lan4 I get Destination Host Unreachable,
> but where as I can see
> that in the tcpdump log for lan4 it does reply back, but it doesn’t
> reach the PC, Is there I am missing
> someth
Hi Andrew,
Thank for your reply.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 4:39 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> I am bit confused on how dsa needs to be actually working,
>> Q's
>> 1] should I be running a dhcp server on eth1 (where switch is connected)
>> so that devices connected on lan* devices get an ip ?
>
> N
> I am bit confused on how dsa needs to be actually working,
> Q's
> 1] should I be running a dhcp server on eth1 (where switch is connected)
> so that devices connected on lan* devices get an ip ?
Nope. You need eth1 up, but otherwise you do not use it. Use the lanX
interfaces like normal Lin
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> Yes I am using fixed phy on slave1, following is my dts:
>
> Posting the original DTS file is better, not the decompiled version.
>
My bad will take care of it next time.
>>
>> ethernet@48484000 {
>> compatible = "ti,dra7-
> Yes I am using fixed phy on slave1, following is my dts:
Posting the original DTS file is better, not the decompiled version.
>
> ethernet@48484000 {
> compatible = "ti,dra7-cpsw", "ti,cpsw";
> ti,hwmods = "gmac";
> clocks = <0x124 0x125>;
>
Hi Andrew,
Thanks for the reply.
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 09:39:50AM +0100, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We are trying to integrate a MAC to an external switch as following:
>>
>> +---++--+
>>
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 09:39:50AM +0100, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are trying to integrate a MAC to an external switch as following:
>
> +---++--+
> || RGMII ||
> |++ K
Hi,
We are trying to integrate a MAC to an external switch as following:
+---++--+
|| RGMII ||
|++ KSZ9897 +-- 1000baseT MDI ("LAN1")
|| PORT 6 | 7-por
27 matches
Mail list logo
