From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 22 May 2001 17:20:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 22 May 2001 17:19:52 -0400 Received: from vp175062.reshsg.uci.edu ([128.195.175.62]:31493 "EHLO moisil.badula.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 22 May 2001 17:18:48 -0400 Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:18:28 -0700 Message-Id: <200105222118.f4MLISL01588@moisil.badula.org> From: Ion Badulescu To: Alan Cox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dax@gurulabs.com (Dax Kelson) Subject: Re: Xircom RealPort versus 3COM 3C3FEM656C In-Reply-To: User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (Linux/2.2.19 (i586)) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 22 May 2001 20:10:41 +0100 (BST), Alan Cox wrote: > Before you give up on the xircom thing, try the -ac kernel and set the box > up to use xircom_cb not xircom_tulip_cb > > That might help a lot It doesn't, it still performs poorly with any of the three available drivers -- xircom_cb, xircom_tulip_cb, and tulip_cb (from the pcmcia package): * Rx gets only about 1.8Mbit/s on a 100Base-TX network with any of the three * Tx gets 80+Mb/s with xircom_tulip_cb and tulip_cb, and less than 30Mb/s with xircom_cb. And no, promisc mode played no role in this experiment, because my test network is switched and otherwise very quiet. Windows drivers handle both Rx and Tx at full speed. I have this feeling that we're handling the card in some (tulip) compat mode, which severely cripples performance. It's hard to tell, without docs... Ion -- It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt.