[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4736f0df-3db2-4342-8bc1-219cbdd996af@lunn.ch>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 17:51:20 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>, Shenwei Wang <shenwei.wang@....com>,
Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
linux-imx@....com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: Ethernet issue on imx6
> # ethtool -S eth0
> NIC statistics:
> tx_dropped: 0
> tx_packets: 10118
> tx_broadcast: 0
> tx_multicast: 13
> tx_crc_errors: 0
> tx_undersize: 0
> tx_oversize: 0
> tx_fragment: 0
> tx_jabber: 0
> tx_collision: 0
> tx_64byte: 130
> tx_65to127byte: 61031
> tx_128to255byte: 19
> tx_256to511byte: 10
> tx_512to1023byte: 5
> tx_1024to2047byte: 14459
> tx_GTE2048byte: 0
> tx_octets: 26219280
These values come from the hardware. They should reflect what actually
made it onto the wire.
Do the values match what the link peer actually received?
Also, can you compare them to what iperf says it transmitted.
>From this, we can rule out the industrial cable, and should also be
able to rule out the receiver is the problem, not the transmitter.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists