[9fans] Intel Pro/1000 PT support? - Plan9

This is a discussion on [9fans] Intel Pro/1000 PT support? - Plan9 ; Is anyone using the Pro/1000 PT quad adapter? From what I can decipher from Intel's specs and ether82563.c, it 'should' work, perhaps with a bit of PCI id tweaking. It would be nice to hear a "yup, it works" before ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: [9fans] Intel Pro/1000 PT support?

  1. [9fans] Intel Pro/1000 PT support?

    Is anyone using the Pro/1000 PT quad adapter? From what I can
    decipher from Intel's specs and ether82563.c, it 'should' work,
    perhaps with a bit of PCI id tweaking. It would be nice to hear a
    "yup, it works" before I order one, though.

    --lyndon

  2. Re: [9fans] Intel Pro/1000 PT support?

    I thought PRO/1000 worked already (see the Wiki)

    On Nov 12, 2007, at 8:20 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:

    > Is anyone using the Pro/1000 PT quad adapter? From what I can
    > decipher from Intel's specs and ether82563.c, it 'should' work,
    > perhaps with a bit of PCI id tweaking. It would be nice to hear a
    > "yup, it works" before I order one, though.
    >
    > --lyndon



  3. Re: [9fans] Intel Pro/1000 PT support?


    On 2007-Nov-12, at 17:25 , Pietro Gagliardi wrote:

    > I thought PRO/1000 worked already (see the Wiki)


    There are a few different Pro/1000 variants. I'm specifically
    interested in the Pro/1000-PT quad-port card. It's based on the 82571
    (according to Intel's online spec's), which is supported by the
    driver. I'm just concerned about any quirks or potential gotchas in
    relation to this specific card (e.g. PCI bus glue, phy interface, or
    what have you).

  4. Re: [9fans] Intel Pro/1000 PT support?

    > > I thought PRO/1000 worked already (see the Wiki)
    >
    > There are a few different Pro/1000 variants. I'm specifically
    > interested in the Pro/1000-PT quad-port card. It's based on the 82571
    > (according to Intel's online spec's), which is supported by the
    > driver. I'm just concerned about any quirks or potential gotchas in
    > relation to this specific card (e.g. PCI bus glue, phy interface, or
    > what have you).


    it's all supported.

    the pro/1000 PT has 2 82571 controllers and a pcie/pcie switch
    (i forget the company that makes that thing). it's a very fancy
    bit of hardware.

    the pcie generation of intel nics are pretty good. for the most
    part, one can ignore the phy. i wish they'd do it like myricom,
    though. myricom thinks the driver is on a need-to-know basis
    about the mac/phy. and the driver doesn't need to know.

    - erik

  5. Re: [9fans] Intel Pro/1000 PT support?

    yes. we are using that adapter. there should be no vid/did tweaking.
    (some motherboards may need bios updates to correctly implement
    the interrupt swizzling spec.)

    all pcie-based gigabit intel controllers should be supported by plan 9.

    by the way, we've found the pro/1000 pt dual to be more cost-effective.
    if you have too many ports to use 2 dual cards, it would probablly be
    more effective to use myricom cards with 10gbaseCX4 ports. interrupt
    coalescing isn't very effective on multiple ports. there's a nice 24gbe+2cx4
    hp procurve switch for less than three grand.

    - erik

  6. Re: [9fans] Intel Pro/1000 PT support?


    On 2007-Nov-12, at 17:34 , erik quanstrom wrote:

    > by the way, we've found the pro/1000 pt dual to be more cost-
    > effective.
    > if you have too many ports to use 2 dual cards, it would probablly be
    > more effective to use myricom cards with 10gbaseCX4 ports


    Thanks for the info Erik. I'll do a cost comparison between the 2x2
    vs. 1x4 config. Traffic volume isn't a big concern this is for a
    machine that will be a (mostly) passive network monitor for several
    LAN segments at a remote site.

    --lyndon

  7. Re: [9fans] Intel Pro/1000 PT support?

    you're welcome.

    - erik

+ Reply to Thread