igb on a Nehalem system, buildworld stats
Mars G Miro
spry at anarchy.in.the.ph
Fri Jan 9 00:02:10 PST 2009
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Mars G Miro <spry at anarchy.in.the.ph> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:33 AM, Jack Vogel <jfvogel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well, I am at Intel you know, and even we don't seem to have any systems
>> with
>> 82576 down in my group here. The way link works I can be about 99.9% sure
>> in saying its not the driver. Its preproduction so there are lots of
>> possibilities,
>> and the biggest problem is its going to be difficult to help when I don't
>> have any
>> such hardware :(
>>
>> I've heard from the 1G product team that they have seen EEPROM mismatches
>> on systems that will result in things not working in funny ways.
>
>
> Jahh, I've seen those but not w/ Intel NICs. I believe it was from
> Broadcom on some IBM x3455? (IIRC) and it was indeed quite amusing ;-)
>
>
>>
>> If you have a back to back connection to another NIC on Port 0, no switch,
>> does
>> it still autoneg to 100?
>>
Connected back to back w/ another box w/ a GigE NIC, it now does 1000baseTX:
igb0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
options=19b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4>
ether 00:30:48:c5:db:e2
inet6 fe80::230:48ff:fec5:dbe2%igb0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
inet 192.168.70.2 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.70.255
media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseTX <full-duplex>)
status: active
But still not without problems. I hafta ifconfig down/up it several
times until I can see the other end. W/c is the same for igb1.
>
[snip]
--
cheers
mars
More information about the freebsd-stable
mailing list