Re: Further on P4R800-VM and 3c59x

Sorry the holidays got in the way.... :-s

I'm getting similar behaviour to Andrej.  The problem I'm worried about
is that every time I try loading a patched or non-redhat kernel under
Fedora, the add-in 3c905C I have also stops working, so I'm wondering if
part of the problem is my setup.

Are there any significant network differences between 2.4 and 2.6?

Ian

On Mon, 2004-01-05 at 10:18, Andrej Prsa wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > I assure you I won't give up until we all run out of ideas! ;)
> > 
> > OK, let's see :-)
> > 
> > > nothing out of the ordinary is reported in /var/log/messages,
> > 
> > You don't get tons of messages prefixed by "eth0:" (or whatever number
> > the interface is) ? Then setting up the debug level didn't work...
> 
> Hmmm, that's weird; my settings are:
> 
> /etc/modules
> 
>   3c59x
> 
> /etc/modules.conf
> 
>   alias eth0 3c59x
>   options 3c59x debug=6
> 
> I don't get any extensive printout to /var/log/messages.
> 
> > > media link is found and recognized as 100Mbit full duplex.
> > 
> > When this happens, what is the state of the desktop computer ? Is the 
> > driver loaded or not ? If yes, does mii-diag report something different 
> > before connecting the cable and while it's connected ?
> 
> The driver was loaded, but I tried unloading it (even removing it from
> /etc/modules and rebooting, just to be 100% sure), the link still gets
> recognized as 100Mbit full duplex. Here is the relevant part from laptop's
> dmesg:
> 
> eth0: Media Link Off
> NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out
> eth0: Transmit timeout, status 00000004 00000000 
> eth0: Media Link On 100mbps full-duplex 
> 
> This is with or without the 3c59x driver loaded.
> 
> > > network cards have to talk to each other, right?
> > 
> > Yep, carrier signals and so on.
> > 
> > > I also checked /proc/interrupts, which are increasing as they
> > > should,
> > 
> > When ? Could you try to make a difference between transmitting and 
> > receiving ? For example, if you assign a fixed IP on the same subnet to 
> > your laptop, you could start "ping" from the laptop; if /proc/interrupts
> > start increasing, it means that it's receiving.
> 
> Desktop:
>   ifconfig 192.168.0.1 pointopoint 192.168.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.255 up
> Laptop:
>   ifconfig 192.168.0.2 pointopoint 192.168.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.255 up
> 
> When pinging from laptop to desktop, /proc/interrupts increases by 2 per
> ping (1 second).
> When pinging from desktop to laptop, /proc/interrupts increases by 1 per
> ping (1 second).
> 
> In both pinging cases /proc/interrupts on the laptop doesn't change. The
> laptop card is a SiS7012, which works without issues with other cards.
> 
> > For transmission is a bit more difficult, one way would be to watch with
> > tcpdump/ethereal if any packets arrive at the other end (on the laptop, 
> > for example).
> 
> Listening on laptop with tcpdump is silent, but listening on desktop with
> tcpdump clearly sees packets:
> 
> 16:03:45.501167 arp who-has 192.168.0.1 tell 192.168.0.2
> 16:03:45.501187 arp reply 192.168.0.1 is-at 0:e:a6:d:d7:65
> 
> (one such block per ping). Thus I suspect receiving is ok, but sending
> doesn't work, right?
> 
> > > /proc/dev/net seems ok as well.
> > 
> > But as you didn't include it, I can't see if there were any
> > packets/bytes accounted for transmission and/or reception :-)
> 
> eth0:
> 
> Receive bytes:    9594
> Receive packets:  80
> Everything else:  0
> 
> Transmit bytes:   7140
> Transmit packets: 120
> Everything else:  0
> 
> Where these transmition packets probably come from pinging its own IP (I
> was checking whether self-pinging produces any eth0: logs in
> /var/log/messages, it doesn't).
> 
> > > Everything is ok that I can tell, except for this glitch of not
> > > working at all! ;)
> > 
> > Isn't it always like this ? :-)
> 
> Yep, but especially like that with this troublesome motherboard; network
> card is the very first device I'm trying to bring to life and there are 12
> pci entries with "Unknown device" description... Glb... ;)
> 
> > > 	Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 64, IRQ 3
> > 
> > By the way, is the interrupt shared with some other device ?
> 
> Not that I know of. Any certain way to make sure?
> 
> After a last look at /var/log/messages, there is a new eth0 entry:
> 
> 16:03:36 eth0: Setting promiscuous mode.
> 16:03:36 device eth0 entered promiscous mode
> 16:03:52 device eth0 left promiscous mode
> 
> No idea what that means. ;)
> 
> Thanks a lot,
> 
> Andrej
> _______________________________________________
> vortex mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.scyld.com/mailman/listinfo/vortex

_______________________________________________
vortex mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.scyld.com/mailman/listinfo/vortex