I agree that realtek are far from something we could cold call a good product. But I have similar setup (with different motherboard) working without a flaw.
All your arguments are valid and worth investigating.
The local lan (eth0) is 100Mbits. Both eth1 and eth2 are realtek (same model/chipset).
I'll have a look at the BIOS settings and removed the vga mode from grub and make sure lm_sensors is installed.
Besides this I am not sure what else I could do. The main question is am I dealing with a falty component (motherboard, cpu, memory, NIC) or some other OS/Software bug?
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 1:59 AM, John R Pierce <pierce@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 12/27/10 9:09 PM, robert mena wrote:
> Regular realtek fast ethernet.
IMNSHO, realtek are pretty close to junk grade NICs. they have far too
many variations with far too many weird bugs when used for any more than
single user desktop kind of systems.
what speed is the local link to the modem? even if your internet
> Each one connected to a broadband modem (1 Mbps each) so I do not
> think this should be a bus saturation.
connection is 1Mbps, if your ethernet is running at 100baseT, that can
be 10MB/sec bursts, and a few of those could potentially cause bus
contention issues
how fast is the LAN? since the errors were on eth3 and eth4, I'm
wondering what eth0, eth1, and eth2 are doing traffic wise.
I wouldn't rely on that assumption. Thermal monitoring might not be
> I do not think this is a thermal problem due to the lack of messages
> (I got this problem in the past with a different machine and I got
> those overheating message - with the throttle but I'll investigate
> further.
>
configured correctly for this board, etc etc.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
