From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Brade Subject: Re: r8169 hard-freezes the system on big network loads Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 12:26:35 +0200 Message-ID: <201109151226.35055.brade@informatik.uni-muenchen.de> References: <201108141308.28140.kjun-chen@sambodha.org> <201109142336.17291.brade@informatik.uni-muenchen.de> <20110915000332.GA13821@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, nic_swsd@realtek.com, Hayes To: Francois Romieu Return-path: Received: from acheron.ifi.lmu.de ([129.187.214.135]:43993 "EHLO acheron.ifi.lmu.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932312Ab1IOK1W (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Sep 2011 06:27:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110915000332.GA13821@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thursday 15 September 2011 02:03:32 Francois Romieu wrote: > Michael Brade : > [...] > > > ok, good news: I did not experience any freeze anymore even though I > > transfered 60 GB. And I applied both of your patches and > > > > - if (status & RxFOVF) { > > - rtl8169_schedule_work(dev, > > rtl8169_reset_task); - > > dev->stats.rx_fifo_errors++; > > - } > > It should not be necessary to remove this part : the status mask is > supposed to take care of it. One of my patches is wrong if this part > needs to go away. ok, I only removed it because you told me so the first time. > [...] > > > so yes but what do you mean with "no real network traffic"? I still get > > 100 MB/s. > > 100 MB/s as 100 Mbyte/s on a gigabit link or 100 Mbit/s on a {gigabit / > fast} ethernet link ? 100 Mbytes on a gigabit link, so almost 100% usage (with ups and downs, of course; maybe between 90 MB/s and 112 MB/s). thanks, Michael