[vortex] Auto-neg or not?

[Donald Becker]

On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 phase2@minotaur.host4u.net wrote:

> Our engineering team doesn't believe auto negotation should be set.

Well, good luck to them.  There is a saying about teaching pigs to sing...

> Here's the specific log issues they think are 'duplex' problems. 
> 
> Sep 15 19:59:50 qwburbank01 kernel: NET: 9380 messages suppressed. 

I tracked this down.
This message comes from a badly designed (I am too polite to write
"incredibly stupid") piece of kernel code designed to throttle messages
to one every five seconds.  Except that the only message emitted is one
saying that messages were suppressed.

The function is  net/core/utils.c:net_ratelimit().  Even the name is
misleading, it doesn't ratelimit anything on the network.  It should be
called net_msg_ratelimit()

> Sep 15 19:59:55 qwburbank01 kernel: NET: 6050 messages suppressed. 
> Sep 15 20:00:00 qwburbank01 kernel: NET: 6598 messages suppressed. 
> Sep 15 20:00:05 qwburbank01 kernel: NET: 5340 messages suppressed. 
> Sep 15 20:00:10 qwburbank01 kernel: NET: 3835 messages suppressed. 
> Sep 15 20:00:15 qwburbank01 kernel: NET: 2848 messages suppressed. 
> Sep 15 20:00:41 qwburbank01 kernel: eth0: Too much work in interrupt, 
> status 8401. 

The net_ratelimit() function has a five second timer.
>From the timing here, the suppressed messages likely have nothing to do
with the device driver.

-- 
Donald Becker				becker@scyld.com
Scyld Computing Corporation		http://www.scyld.com
410 Severn Ave. Suite 210		Second Generation Beowulf Clusters
Annapolis MD 21403			410-990-9993