From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Chapman Subject: Re: e1000 driver and samba Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:24:15 +0100 Message-ID: <46ED58AF.1070000@katalix.com> References: <780b6f780709131904j41148fb4p827e87530b15d6e9@mail.gmail.com> <46EAC25B.2060404@intel.com> <780b6f780709141140l1fd586c9p2aa8efe6ed803d38@mail.gmail.com> <46EAF644.1040006@intel.com> <46EC1A00.2000304@katalix.com> <46EC2D5A.7080504@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: L F , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: "Kok, Auke" Return-path: Received: from s36.avahost.net ([74.53.95.194]:40297 "EHLO s36.avahost.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751821AbXIPQYS (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Sep 2007 12:24:18 -0400 In-Reply-To: <46EC2D5A.7080504@intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Kok, Auke wrote: > James Chapman wrote: >> Kok, Auke wrote: >>>> rx_long_byte_count: 34124849453 >> >> Are these long frames expected in your network? What is the MTU of the >> transmitting clients? Perhaps this might explain why reads work >> (because data is coming from the Linux box so the packets have smaller >> MTU) while writes cause delays or packet loss because the clients are >> sending long frames which are getting fragmented? > > those are not "long frames" but the number of bytes the hardware counted > in its "long" data type based byte counter. Thanks for correcting me, Auke. Should this counter be renamed to avoid someone else making this mistake in the future? Just a thought. -- James Chapman Katalix Systems Ltd http://www.katalix.com Catalysts for your Embedded Linux software development