From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:53:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:53:21 -0500 Received: from deviant.impure.org.uk ([195.82.120.238]:20386 "EHLO deviant.impure.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:53:21 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 19:03:29 +0000 From: Dave Jones To: Andrew Morton Cc: Felipe Alfaro Solana , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.5.65-mm1: eth0: Transmit error, Tx status register 90 Message-ID: <20030319190329.GA28277@suse.de> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , Andrew Morton , Felipe Alfaro Solana , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20030319013042.19266.qmail@linuxmail.org> <20030318191833.317fa459.akpm@digeo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030318191833.317fa459.akpm@digeo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 07:18:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Is it slow with both scp and NFS? Or just NFS? > > If just NFS then yes, I see this too. Transferring files 2.5->2.4 over NFS > is several times slower than 2.4->2.4 or 2.5->2.5. Quite repeatable. You could be hitting the same problems I saw a few weeks back. Short: There were a *lot* of bogus UDP packets being transmitted. Trond took a look at a tcpdump log of bad traffic and found there were all sorts of silly things in there like oversized frames etc. I've not had time to look into this since then, but also see strange effects of this bug like failing md5sums after copying over NFS. Dave