Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
> Analysis follows, but I wanted to ask you to bisect back if you can to
> find the apparent patch to make the difference.  Basically at this
> point I'd say its not likely to be an e1000 issue, but I'd like to
> follow up and make sure.

That's going to be ugly, since I can't reproduce it at will. Maybe if
I netperf it to the other box I can push it over.

> Nothing seems out of order, but the latency may be low, I'd be curious
> what these looked like before with the old kernel.  Some of the other
> things to compare would have been the lspci -vv output from your
> chipset with old/new kernel, in case the bridge/system configuration
> changed.  There are no known problems right now with this chipset
> 82546EB

OK. will try later when I have more time. For now I switched to the
onboard via rhine controller.

> shared int, fine, but whats with the ERR: ?

Hmm. Having rebooted they look rather lower. but might be a time thing.

            CPU0
   0:    1405995          XT-PIC  timer
   1:       5910          XT-PIC  i8042
   2:          0          XT-PIC  cascade
   5:          0          XT-PIC  uhci_hcd:usb3
   7:      27135          XT-PIC  ehci_hcd:usb2, VIA8237, eth0
  10:          0          XT-PIC  uhci_hcd:usb4, uhci_hcd:usb5, 
uhci_hcd:usb6
  11:          0          XT-PIC  ehci_hcd:usb1, uhci_hcd:usb7, 
uhci_hcd:usb8
  12:     157547          XT-PIC  i8042
  14:      36296          XT-PIC  ide0
  15:     196690          XT-PIC  ide1
NMI:          0
LOC:    1406006
ERR:         26

> except you didn't include any of the e1000 load information nor the
> system's boot information as it came up.

OK, it had gone since reboot, but I rebooted just now .... new info
attached.

> This chipset is one of the most frequent common elements in problem
> reports of TX hangs for e1000.  My current theory (we've bought a
> bunch of these systems and never reproduced the issue) is that there
> is something either design specific or BIOS specific that causes this
> chipset to interact very badly with e1000 hardware.  Some systems have
> the issue and some don't.  If you could bisect back to a working point
> it would be interesting to see where that pointed.

OK, is going to be hard to bisect, since the other one was an Ubuntu
kernel, but I guess I can give 2.6.15 virgin a shot, at least.

> doesn't seem you're overclocked.  Good.

Nah, I'm pretty conservative with hardware, get enough problems when
it's all running within specs ;-)

Thanks for looking at all this.

M.