[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLXXs77yxahw_H+u02uSdN8WOxdjdXVxhxB4YJGssumY4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 11:38:30 -0700
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To: Dean Jenkins <Dean_Jenkins@...tor.com>
Cc: "David B. Robins" <linux@...idrobins.net>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mark Craske <Mark_Craske@...tor.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
YongQin Liu <yongqin.liu@...aro.org>,
Guodong Xu <guodong.xu@...aro.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] asix: Lots of asix_rx_fixup() errors and slow transmissions
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Dean Jenkins <Dean_Jenkins@...tor.com> wrote:
> A good test would be to run "ping -c 1 -s $packet_length $ip_address" inside
> a script which has a loop with an increasing payload length $packet_length
> with a small delay between ping calls. This will show whether particular
> packet sizes trigger the failures.
>
> Then try with "ping -f -c 200 -s $packet_length $ip_address" to load up the
> USB link.
I've tried both of these on my x86_64 system. I can send single pings
up to 65507 without triggering the issue (after which I get errors
sending on the host side as I think I cross a 64k boundary with
headers, not the asix errors).
Then when I try ping -f -c 200 -s 65507 $ip_address, I don't see any
failures. I did it for a count of 2000 as well without any issues.
I'll be adding more debug prints in soon.
thanks
-john
Powered by blists - more mailing lists