From: Vincent Poy (vince_at_pele.WURLDLINK.NET)
Date: Tue Sep 10 2002 - 15:57:06 EDT
Hello Eric,
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Cottrell, Eric wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Well I was running a different linux distribution when it worked.
> For some of the linksys cards they provide a linux driver but you need
> to compile the kernel to use it. I got the Xircom for the OS/2 support
> and the PCMPC200 was put on the backup pile. I tended to like Linksys
> for their OS/2 support but they did not bother for the PCMPC200.
> Cardbus support for OS/2 is "fuzzy". There are Cardbus drivers but
> Xircom uses a separate enabler/driver.
Which Linux distribution were you using? I wonder if there is any
internal differences between the PCMPC200 and the PCM200 from LinkSys
since one has a dongle and the other doesn't but I wonder if the internal
chipset is the same.
> Unfortunely I am not using OS/2 as much because IBM is shutting off updates
> and improvements to people who do not have a subscription. Linux has filled
> the gap.
What is actually the latest version of OS/2 anyways? I haven't
followed it much after 3.0 since I think it didn't support running Windows
programs in enhanced mode emulation but only 16 bit mode.
> So I can get the PCMPC200 going but it is like 47th on my to-do list.
> I doubt I would do it unless my Xircom fails. Also I do not run FreeBSD
> so I do not know the driver state. I think posting on a FreeBSD list is
> a good idea.
I'm trying to find a card that works. FreeBSD's cardbus support
is still in the testing stage. I noticed the 3Com 3CXFEM656C Cardbus
10/100 NIC + 56k modem combo card I have has interrupt problems under my
TP770Z but when I tried it on a friends Dell Inspiron 8200 with my HDD, it
was fine and the transfer speeds were about 50% faster too no matter which
PCMCIA card I used. Speaking about Xircom, I noticed with FreeBSD, there
is a xircom driver as well as two different Tulip drivers. One is for the
DEC 21x4x and the other is for 21143 based. I remember the 21143 was a
Intel chip after the tulip was sold to Intel from DEC. So I wonder for
Xircom, do they have two varieties of cards, one using the Tulip and one
using their own chip? How do you tell from the model number on the Xircom
which one is the good one? Since Xircom seems to have both the type II
cardbus dongle type and the RealPort models, I always thought the RealPort
used a Xircom chipset inside since I remember IBM and Intel both had the
RealPort cards in blue instead of red and it was using the Xircom chipset
inside.
> As to the other observations I can comment that I have seen differences
> between windows and linux performance. It is due not only to the NIC
> card but also the drivers, TCP/IP stacks. and applications. I have seen
> comments that some parameters in Windows TCP/IP may need adjusting in
> certain conditions. It may be possible to do some tuning to improve
> performance. I find that the http://www.practicallynetworked.com site
> gives some good information on networking.
Already done all the required tweaks since it's not RFC 1323 or
RFC 1644. I have TCP Window size set at 32767. What I noticed is that
the ThinkPad 770Z seems to be slower in networking than the Dell Inspiron
8200 atleast with FreeBSD since the Dell gives a 50% increase in xfer
rates. I actually hit 10.5Mbytes/sec with the Dell but only 6Mbytes/sec
with the 770Z. When I transfer files via ftp between the Windows XP Pro
desktop and notebook, it does do 10.5Mbytes/sec so it's probably something
else altogether. The xfer rates are twice as fast when I do the ftp
session on the FreeBSD machine and send/receive with the Windows machine
than the other way around.
> I am happy with the Xircom card and for my non-cardbus machines a
> 3com 10/100 card and Linksys PCMPC100 card. I had to tranfer files from
> a sick 365XD to the backup 365X. I did it over the network and the file
> transfer was faster than a parallel laplink cable 8->.
Heh. Do you find the 3Com cards all that good though? Since it
seems Intel is the one who makes the best performing NICs but the tulip is
a better value. 3Com seems to be more on selling their name than quality
since like David Goldman mentioned, the 3Com Combo NIC cards do overheat
and then are slow until you cool it down.
> 73 Eric eac_at_shore.net WB1HBU
Cheers,
Vince - vince_at_WURLDLINK.NET - Vice President ________ __ ____
Unix Networking Operations - FreeBSD-Real Unix for Free / / / / | / |[__ ]
WurldLink Corporation / / / / | / | __] ]
San Francisco - Honolulu - Hong Kong / / / / / |/ / | __] ]
HongKong Stars/Gravis UltraSound Mailing Lists Admin /_/_/_/_/|___/|_|[____]
Almighty1_at_IRC - oahu.DAL.NET Hawaii's DALnet IRC Network Server Admin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vincent Poy [mailto:vince_at_pele.WURLDLINK.NET]
> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 1:54 PM
> To: Cottrell, Eric
> Cc: thinkpad_at_cs.utk.edu
> Subject: RE: 32bit Cardbus 10/100 Fast Ethernet NIC recommendations for
> Th inkPad
>
>
> Hello Eric and the Thinkpad list:
>
> Pretty interesting that the Linksys PCMPC200 is no longer working
> but was working before. I think some Xircom's had their own chip in it
> and some had Intel's 8255x chip in it. I think the Intel and IBM versions
> of the RealPort card are identical to the Xircom ones. What's extended
> passive mode and also were the speeds the same when you tried initiating
> the ftp session on the Windows machine to the Linux machine since for some
> reason, for FreeBSD atleast, the if I ftp from the FreeBSD machine to the
> Windows box and send/receive, it's 6.4MBytes/sec or about 50Mbps. But if
> I did ftp from the Windows machine and send/receive, it's 3.2Mbytes/sec or
> about 30Mbps or so. When I meant ping times, I wasn't talking about ping
> times on the LAN since all of mines are under 0.10ms through my HP
> ProCurve 4000M 40 port 10/100 managed switch. I'm talking about the DSL
> Router on the other side of my DSL connection at the ISP since the latency
> is 5-6ms more from a Windows machine than from the FreeBSD machine. Here
> is a message I posted yesterday on the FreeBSD Mailing list. I bought the
> LinkSys PCM200, NetGear FA511 and the Siemens/Efficent Networks SS1012.
>
> >From vince_at_oahu.WURLDLINK.NET Thu Sep 5 08:51:04 2002
> Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 05:03:34 -1000 (HST)
> From: Vincent Poy <vince_at_oahu.WURLDLINK.NET>
> To: FreeBSD-mobile_at_FreeBSD.ORG
> Subject: Linksys PCM200 v2/NetGear FA511 Cardbus PCMCIA 10/100 NIC cards
> supported?
> Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 08:50:35 -1000 (HST)
> Resent-From: Vincent Poy <vince_at_oahu.WURLDLINK.NET>
> Resent-To: vince_at_pele.WURLDLINK.NET
> Resent-Subject: Linksys PCM200 v2/NetGear FA511 Cardbus PCMCIA 10/100 NIC
> cards supported?
>
> Greetings everyone:
>
> Has anyone managed to get either the Linksys PCM200 v2 or the
> NetGear FA511 Cardbus PCMCIA 10/100 NIC cards running under a recent
> -current? I've tried both cards on the JP August 18, 2002 -current
> snapshots but they seem to show the following:
>
> Linksys PCM200 v2
> cardbus0: Expecting link target, got 0xff
> cardbus0: Resource not specified in CIS: id=10, size=100
> cardbus0: Resource not specified in CIS: id=14, size=400
> cardbus0: <unknown card> (vendor=0x1737, dev=0xab09) at 0.0 irq 11
> cbb0: CardBus card activation failed
>
> NetGear FA311
> cardbus0: Expecting link target, got 0xff
> cardbus0: Resource not specified in CIS: id=10, size=100
> cardbus0: Resource not specified in CIS: id=14, size=400
> cardbus0: <unknown card> (vendor=0x1317, dev=0x1985) at 0.0 irq 11
> cbb0: CardBus card activation failed
>
> When I tried the 3COM 3CXFEM656C 10/100 Ethernet + 56k modem combo
> card, the card would recognize but will result in xl0: watchdog timeout
> as soon as I add the IP address.
> If I hotswapped cards, this is what it would say:
>
> xl0: no memory for list buffers!
> device_probe_and_attach: xl0 attach returned 6
> Product version: 5.0
> Product name: 3Com Corporation | 3CXFEM656C-MDM | MDM | 1 |
> Manufacturer ID: 02016565
> Functions: Serial Port, Multi-Functioned
> Function Extension: 011f3f000400000400
> Function Extension: 0206003f1c03030f060000ff
> Function Extension: 1306000f006a00ff
> Function Extension: 2306000f000200ff
> CIS reading done
> cardbus0: Resource not specified in CIS: id=10, size=100
> cardbus0: Resource not specified in CIS: id=14, size=100
> cardbus0: <unknown card> (vendor=0x10b7, dev=0x6565) at 0.1 irq 11
> cbb0: CardBus card activation failed
>
>
> The only card I successfully got working is the Efficient
> Networks/Siemens SpeedStream 1012 CardBus which identifies as:
>
> cardbus0: Expecting link target, got 0xff
> cardbus0: Resource not specified in CIS: id=10, size=100
> cardbus0: Resource not specified in CIS: id=14, size=400
> dc0: <Accton EN2242 MiniPCI 10/100BaseTX> port 0x1000-0x10ff mem
> 0x88000000-0x880003ff irq 11 at device 0.0 on cardbus0
> dc0: Ethernet address: 00:30:f1:2d:77:f1
> miibus0: <MII bus> on dc0
> ukphy0: <Generic IEEE 802.3u media interface> on miibus0
> ukphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto
>
> The only thing I noticed is that when I do ftp filetransfers at
> 100Mbps FullDuplex via a HP ProCurve swtich with a Windows machine, it the
> ftp was done on the Windows XP Pro machine, it would max out at 2.4Mbps
> while ftping on the FreeBSD machine to the Windows XP Pro machine, it
> would max out at 48Mbps. dc0 seems to give the following messages on the
> console:
>
> dc0: failed to force tx and rx to idle state
> dc0: TX underrun -- increasing TX threshold
> dc0: TX underrun -- increasing TX threshold
> dc0: TX underrun -- increasing TX threshold
> dc0: TX underrun -- using store and forward mode
>
> I also noticed with both the 3Com and the SpeedStream, it would
> have the following message...
>
> /usr/src/sys/vm/uma_core.c:1332: could sleep with "dc0" locked from
> /usr/src/sys/pci/if_dc.c:609
> /usr/src/sys/vm/uma_core.c:1332: could sleep with "dc0" locked from
> /usr/src/sys/pci/if_dc.c:609
>
> Except with the 3Com, it would say xl0 and if_xl.c instead.
> Thanks in advance for any help anyone can provide.
>
> Cheers,
> Vince - vince_at_WURLDLINK.NET - Vice President ________ __ ____
> Unix Networking Operations - FreeBSD-Real Unix for Free / / / / | / |[__ ]
> WurldLink Corporation / / / / | / | __] ]
> San Francisco - Honolulu - Hong Kong / / / / / |/ / | __] ]
> HongKong Stars/Gravis UltraSound Mailing Lists Admin /_/_/_/_/|___/|_|[____]
> Almighty1_at_IRC - oahu.DAL.NET Hawaii's DALnet IRC Network Server Admin
>
>
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Cottrell, Eric wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Well I tried some tests but the Linksys PCMPC200 is not working.
> > I changed to SuSE 8.0 and it looks like the tulip driver is at a
> > level known not to work with the PCMPC200. I use the Xircom day
> > to day.
> >
> > The same driver (it mentions it is modified to work with
> > Xircom) is used for the Xircom RBE-100. A driver message
> > mentions that it is using the Dec 21143 mode of the card. So I
> > only tested the Xircom. I am using SuSE 8.0 with the 2.4.18
> > kernel. The PCMCIA drivers are D. Hinds PCMCIA-CS package
> > version 3.1.33. Hardware was a TP 600e with 288 Megs of Ram,
> > a 366 MHz Pentium II processor, and a 4200 RPM 30 GB hard drive.
> >
> > I have a simple network consisting of a Linksys 4 port switch/DSL
> > router. All the tests went through the switch. All tests used
> > full duplex (one of the advantages of using a switch).
> >
> > Ping times to the router were from 0.62 to 0.77 millSecond (MS).
> > Ping tines to the ftp host on a desktop with a Linksys LNE100TX NIC
> > were 0.10 to 0.12 MS. Ping times to a small server using an
> > intergrated SiS900 chip were 0.14 to 0.16 MS. Both systems are
> > using different recent versions of Linux. Hum looks like the
> > hardware on the other end does make a difference 8->.
> >
> > I used ncftp in "Extended Passive Mode" to transfer files
> > between the systems.
> >
> > Put (TP -> Desktop) 74049955 byte file in 11 seconds at 5.99 MB/s
> > Get (Desktop -> TP) 74049955 byte file in 6 seconds at 11.16 MB/s
> >
> > Put (TP -> Desktop) 89047265 byte file in 13 seconds at 6.07 MB/s
> > Get (Desktop -> TP) 89047265 byte file in 7 seconds at 11.22 MB/s
> >
> > So not including the overhead the best I can get is about 89 Megabits
> > per second data transfer. It also appears that the TP is alittle
> > short of horsepower to get a file and put it up on a FTP server.
> > The FTP Server is a 1 GHz P3 with a 7200 RPM HD.
> >
> > I have gotten similar results in the past when using the Linksys PCMPC200
> > with the fixed linux driver.
> >
> > 73 Eric ecottrell_at_doble.com
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:59:19 EST