• Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
Netgate Discussion Forum
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login

Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?

Hardware
19
189
69.5k
Loading More Posts
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • S
    Setarcos @stephenw10
    last edited by Setarcos Jul 27, 2021, 3:41 PM Jul 27, 2021, 3:38 PM

    @stephenw10 said in Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?:

    You are talking about?:

    dev.igc.0.mac_stats.missed_packets: 1497
    

    That does seem high, especially as a percentage of the total packets received!

    dev.igc.0.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_recvd: 281
    dev.igc.0.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_recvd: 14
    dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_pkts_recvd: 295
    dev.igc.0.mac_stats.total_pkts_recvd: 1792
    

    Yes, this is what I was referring to. The "in" packet count shows 0 on the UI though and I haven't managed to capture any inbound traffic on the I225-LM interface during testing. Note that the sysctl output and UI Status/Interfaces text capture for this interface (third text block from my previous reply) were taken a few minutes apart so the counters are not exactly the same.

    dev.igc.3.reg_dump: General Registers
    	CTRL	 58140641
    	STATUS	 40780683
    	CTRL_EXIT	 10000040
    
    Interrupt Registers
    	ICR	 00000000
    
    RX Registers
    	RCTL	 0444801e
    	RDLEN	 00004000
    	RDH	 0000000e
    	RDT	 0000000d
    	RXDCTL	 02040808
    	RDBAL	 04a65000
    	RDBAH	 00000000
    
    TX Registers
    	TCTL	 a503f0fa
    	TDBAL	 04a27000
    	TDBAH	 00000000
    	TDLEN	 00004000
    	TDH	 000001d0
    	TDT	 000001d0
    	TXDCTL	 0201011f
    	TDFH	 00000000
    	TDFT	 00000000
    	TDFHS	 00000000
    	TDFPC	 00000000
    
    
    dev.igc.3.%pnpinfo: vendor=0x8086 device=0x15f3 subvendor=0x8086 subdevice=0x0000 class=0x020000
    dev.igc.3.%location: slot=0 function=0 dbsf=pci0:7:0:0 handle=\_SB_.PCI0.PEX6.PXSX
    dev.igc.3.%driver: igc
    dev.igc.3.%desc: Intel(R) PRO/1000 PCI-Express Network Driver
    

    So it's a different device ID. The registers are set differently.

    Yes, but isn't the device ID difference to be expected? The I225-LM and I225-V have different IDs (0x15F2 and 0x15F3 respectively per https://github.com/pfsense/FreeBSD-src/blob/devel-12/sys/dev/igc/igc_hw.h#L44) Are there any pertinent differences in the registers between the two?

    dev.igc.0.reg_dump: General Registers
            CTRL     181c0641
            STATUS   40380683
            CTRL_EXIT        10000040
    
    Interrupt Registers
            ICR      00000000
    
    RX Registers
            RCTL     0440801e
            RDLEN    00004000
            RDH      00000000
            RDT      00000080
            RXDCTL   02040808
            RDBAL    033a8000
            RDBAH    00000001
    
    TX Registers
            TCTL     a503f0fa
            TDBAL    0336a000
            TDBAH    00000001
            TDLEN    00004000
            TDH      00000013
            TDT      00000375
            TXDCTL   0201011f
            TDFH     00000000
            TDFT     00000000
            TDFHS    00000000
            TDFPC    00000000
    
    
    dev.igc.0.%pnpinfo: vendor=0x8086 device=0x15f2 subvendor=0x1baa subdevice=0xc002 class=0x020000
    dev.igc.0.%location: slot=0 function=0 dbsf=pci0:4:0:0
    dev.igc.0.%driver: igc
    dev.igc.0.%desc: Intel(R) PRO/1000 PCI-Express Network Driver
    
    S 1 Reply Last reply Jul 27, 2021, 4:25 PM Reply Quote 0
    • S
      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator @Setarcos
      last edited by Jul 27, 2021, 4:25 PM

      @setarcos said in Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?:

      Yes, but isn't the device ID difference to be expected?

      Yes it is. I'm just saying it's different to the NIC in the 6100 so it may not have been tested.

      Are there any pertinent differences in the registers between the two?

      I don't know. The spec sheets don't look significantly different though.

      S 1 Reply Last reply Jul 28, 2021, 7:44 AM Reply Quote 0
      • S
        Setarcos @stephenw10
        last edited by Jul 28, 2021, 7:44 AM

        @stephenw10

        Does your 6100 have any igc driver tunables set? Here is what I am currently using (defaults):

        [21.05-RELEASE][root@cerberus.setarcos.lan]/root: sysctl -a hw.igc
        hw.igc.max_interrupt_rate: 8000
        hw.igc.eee_setting: 1
        hw.igc.rx_process_limit: 100
        hw.igc.sbp: 1
        hw.igc.smart_pwr_down: 0
        hw.igc.rx_abs_int_delay: 66
        hw.igc.tx_abs_int_delay: 66
        hw.igc.rx_int_delay: 0
        hw.igc.tx_int_delay: 66
        hw.igc.disable_crc_stripping: 0
        

        I have a 2.5Gbe device on the way and will be able to test with that shortly, but have otherwise run out of things to try.

        L 1 Reply Last reply Jul 29, 2021, 2:22 AM Reply Quote 0
        • S
          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
          last edited by Jul 28, 2021, 12:55 PM

          Just the same default values you're using:

          [21.05-RELEASE][admin@6100-2.stevew.lan]/root: sysctl hw.igc
          hw.igc.max_interrupt_rate: 8000
          hw.igc.eee_setting: 1
          hw.igc.rx_process_limit: 100
          hw.igc.sbp: 1
          hw.igc.smart_pwr_down: 0
          hw.igc.rx_abs_int_delay: 66
          hw.igc.tx_abs_int_delay: 66
          hw.igc.rx_int_delay: 0
          hw.igc.tx_int_delay: 66
          hw.igc.disable_crc_stripping: 0
          

          Steve

          S 2 Replies Last reply Jul 29, 2021, 2:44 AM Reply Quote 0
          • L
            lra @Setarcos
            last edited by Jul 29, 2021, 2:22 AM

            @setarcos

            You may want to try the card in a Linux 5.10+ system just to prove it is functioning properly.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • S
              Setarcos @stephenw10
              last edited by Jul 29, 2021, 2:44 AM

              This post is deleted!
              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • S
                Setarcos @stephenw10
                last edited by Jul 29, 2021, 3:01 AM

                @stephenw10

                My 2.5GbE device arrived today, and while the port does seem to negotiate the line rate correctly when both forced and autodetected, the original problem remains and no inbound packets from the device attached to the i225-LM port are making it through.

                Just for grins I tried disabling CRC stripping with hw.igc.disable_crc_stripping=1, and while I still don't see any in packets making it through, the error in counter is no longer incrementing for every packet received as it had before.

                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tso_txd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_1024_1522: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_512_1023: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_256_511: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_128_255: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_65_127: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_64: 8
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_txd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_txd: 8
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_pkts_txd: 8
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.total_pkts_txd: 8
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_octets_txd: 512
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_octets_recvd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_1024_1522: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_512_1023: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_256_511: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_128_255: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_65_127: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_64: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_recvd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_recvd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_pkts_recvd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.total_pkts_recvd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xoff_txd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xoff_recvd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xon_txd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xon_recvd: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.alignment_errs: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.crc_errs: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_errs: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_jabber: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_oversize: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_fragmented: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_undersize: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_no_buff: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.missed_packets: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.defer_count: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.sequence_errors: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.symbol_errors: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.collision_count: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.late_coll: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.multiple_coll: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.single_coll: 0
                dev.igc.0.mac_stats.excess_coll: 0
                

                @lra that is a good idea, but I don't have a spare system to give this a try on at the moment. I will be building a TrueNAS SCALE box in the next month or so and can give it a try then. In the mean-time I'll probably try picking up another NIC to test.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                  last edited by Jul 29, 2021, 12:27 PM

                  Hmm, there it's showing 0 packets received at all not just bad packets as it was before.
                  Was it actually connected when that was taken?

                  S 1 Reply Last reply Jul 29, 2021, 3:23 PM Reply Quote 0
                  • S
                    Setarcos @stephenw10
                    last edited by Jul 29, 2021, 3:23 PM

                    @stephenw10 said in Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?:

                    Hmm, there it's showing 0 packets received at all not just bad packets as it was before.
                    Was it actually connected when that was taken?

                    Yes, the port was actually connected to a test device and had received a few ARP replies from the test device when this was taken, but the system had been recently restarted resetting the counters and had only been online a few minutes at that point.

                    As another experiment, I modified the interface settings to use the second physical interface on the dual I225-LM card and it was exhibiting the same issues, but I let it sit overnight, and it does appear to have accumulated errors after all:

                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.tso_txd: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.tx_frames_1024_1522: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.tx_frames_512_1023: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.tx_frames_256_511: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.tx_frames_128_255: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.tx_frames_65_127: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.tx_frames_64: 17
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_txd: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_txd: 17
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.good_pkts_txd: 17
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.total_pkts_txd: 2860
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.good_octets_txd: 1088
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.good_octets_recvd: 32321
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_1024_1522: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_512_1023: 28
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_256_511: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_128_255: 37
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_65_127: 34
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_64: 26
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_recvd: 100
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_recvd: 3
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.good_pkts_recvd: 125
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.total_pkts_recvd: 2967
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.xoff_txd: 2843
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.xoff_recvd: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.xon_txd: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.xon_recvd: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.alignment_errs: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.crc_errs: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.recv_errs: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.recv_jabber: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.recv_oversize: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.recv_fragmented: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.recv_undersize: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.recv_no_buff: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.missed_packets: 2842
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.defer_count: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.sequence_errors: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.symbol_errors: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.collision_count: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.late_coll: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.multiple_coll: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.single_coll: 0
                    dev.igc.1.mac_stats.excess_coll: 0
                    

                    I decided to go a different route and picked up an X710-T2L and will be returning the QNAP QXG-2G2T-I225 as my return window will have closed by the time I have a chance to test this card on a Linux box to see if the issues persist. That said, I will still have the I225-LM card installed and available for testing through early next week so if you would like me to do any additional testing beforehand, please let me know.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                      last edited by Jul 29, 2021, 4:07 PM

                      I'm not sure what else we can do there. It's just rejecting almost all the traffic it sees at some low level. It 'feels' like a hardware off loading issue to me. It all reports as disabled but maybe on that particular chip some register is set/not set that the driver doesn't see? No easy way to tell.

                      J 1 Reply Last reply Aug 2, 2021, 4:30 PM Reply Quote 0
                      • J
                        jerseymike @stephenw10
                        last edited by Aug 2, 2021, 4:30 PM

                        @stephenw10 Not sure if it's 100% relevant but I am using two of the single-port versions of the QNAP 2.5Gbe card, and could not get the DNS resolver to work at all. After disabling hardward crc offloading, the issue was resolved, so there's definitely something wonky with this driver/card combo.

                        S 1 Reply Last reply Aug 2, 2021, 4:48 PM Reply Quote 0
                        • S
                          Setarcos @jerseymike
                          last edited by Aug 2, 2021, 4:48 PM

                          @jerseymike said in Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?:

                          @stephenw10 Not sure if it's 100% relevant but I am using two of the single-port versions of the QNAP 2.5Gbe card, and could not get the DNS resolver to work at all. After disabling hardward crc offloading, the issue was resolved, so there's definitely something wonky with this driver/card combo.

                          This seems to align with @slk2k 's findings in the thread here, however, it seems to have no effect with the dual port QNAP QXG-2G2T-I225 card I have been testing with. I had initially tried disabling TX and RX CRC offloading from the UI, but later did so directly with ifconfig and both yielded the same results (no inbound packets are making it through).

                          S X 2 Replies Last reply Aug 3, 2021, 11:40 AM Reply Quote 0
                          • S
                            stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                            last edited by Aug 2, 2021, 7:07 PM

                            Hmm, have either of you tried FreeBSD directly?

                            That should be no different but....

                            S 1 Reply Last reply Aug 4, 2021, 4:26 AM Reply Quote 0
                            • S
                              slk2k @Setarcos
                              last edited by Aug 3, 2021, 11:40 AM

                              @setarcos

                              Now that the system has been in place for a long weekend, I checked the stats and nothing is unusual - no missed packets. Things looks reasonably well (other than a crap-ton of interrupts, but that's because all the HW offloading is turned off).

                              /root: sysctl -a dev.igc.0
                              dev.igc.0.interrupts.rx_desc_min_thresh: 0
                              dev.igc.0.interrupts.asserts: 59793578
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tso_txd: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_1024_1522: 29552898
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_512_1023: 337783
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_256_511: 2041523
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_128_255: 867472
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_65_127: 11716942
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_64: 9123432
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_txd: 67
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_txd: 268
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_pkts_txd: 53640050
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.total_pkts_txd: 53640050
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_octets_txd: 47517179206
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_octets_recvd: 94980575076
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_1024_1522: 61648203
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_512_1023: 760161
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_256_511: 1040034
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_128_255: 1551643
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_65_127: 6856810
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_64: 15037895
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_recvd: 128920
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_recvd: 623916
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_pkts_recvd: 86894746
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.total_pkts_recvd: 86894746
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xoff_txd: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xoff_recvd: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xon_txd: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xon_recvd: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.alignment_errs: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.crc_errs: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_errs: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_jabber: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_oversize: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_fragmented: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_undersize: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_no_buff: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.missed_packets: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.defer_count: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.sequence_errors: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.symbol_errors: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.collision_count: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.late_coll: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.multiple_coll: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.single_coll: 0
                              dev.igc.0.mac_stats.excess_coll: 0
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_3.rx_irq: 0
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_3.rxd_tail: 287
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_3.rxd_head: 288
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_2.rx_irq: 0
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_2.rxd_tail: 374
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_2.rxd_head: 375
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_1.rx_irq: 0
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_1.rxd_tail: 165
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_1.rxd_head: 166
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_0.rx_irq: 0
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_0.rxd_tail: 363
                              dev.igc.0.queue_rx_0.rxd_head: 364
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_3.tx_irq: 0
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_3.txd_tail: 647
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_3.txd_head: 647
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_2.tx_irq: 0
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_2.txd_tail: 789
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_2.txd_head: 789
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_1.tx_irq: 0
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_1.txd_tail: 754
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_1.txd_head: 754
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_0.tx_irq: 0
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_0.txd_tail: 294
                              dev.igc.0.queue_tx_0.txd_head: 294
                              dev.igc.0.fc_low_water: 32752
                              dev.igc.0.fc_high_water: 32768
                              dev.igc.0.rx_control: 71335966
                              dev.igc.0.device_control: 404489793
                              dev.igc.0.watchdog_timeouts: 0
                              dev.igc.0.rx_overruns: 0
                              dev.igc.0.link_irq: 2
                              dev.igc.0.dropped: 0
                              dev.igc.0.eee_control: 1
                              dev.igc.0.itr: 488
                              dev.igc.0.tx_abs_int_delay: 66
                              dev.igc.0.rx_abs_int_delay: 66
                              dev.igc.0.tx_int_delay: 66
                              dev.igc.0.rx_int_delay: 0
                              dev.igc.0.rs_dump: 0
                              

                              But my thruput seems off. My previous modem and connection I would get a higher thruput on the speedtest (like 940M down, 42M up). Now I can't test higher than 860M down, 36M up). Might have more to do with the modem as much as the NIC ports. I get the same directly connected to the modem.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • S
                                Setarcos @stephenw10
                                last edited by Aug 4, 2021, 4:26 AM

                                @stephenw10 said in Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?:

                                Hmm, have either of you tried FreeBSD directly?

                                That should be no different but....

                                I have not, but a fair comparison would include both vanilla FreeBSD 12.2 with the igc driver added and a Linux kernel 5.10+ based distro with a variety of I225-LM and I225-V hardware. I just don't have the physical hardware to test this out in my homelab.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • S
                                  stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                  last edited by Aug 4, 2021, 2:01 PM

                                  I would test with any FreeBSD version that has the driver just to know if it works at all there. That looks like only Main right now: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/tree/main/sys/dev/igc
                                  So I'd test a snapshot.

                                  Steve

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • B
                                    bk150
                                    last edited by bk150 Aug 5, 2021, 5:30 AM Aug 5, 2021, 5:00 AM

                                    Wow I'm glad i found this post. I have 2 of the QNAP I225-LM cards installed with pfsense 2.5.2 and the DNS resolver wasn't working on a fresh install. I was absolutely tearing my hair out trying to figure out why it wasn't working (blaming my AT&T fiber gateway that I'm forced to use...).

                                    ipv6 also wasn't working using DHCPv6 prefix delegation. The WAN interface I225-LM could get an address but none of the clients on my LAN interface I225-LM network could.

                                    Using two integrated I-211 and I-219 gigabit controllers on the motherboard yields no such issues. Let me know if there is anything specific that anyone wants me to test while I still have the 2 troublesome I225-LM cards.

                                    Edit: I reinstalled 2.5.2 and disabled hardware offloading and now everything is working great.

                                    S S 2 Replies Last reply Aug 5, 2021, 7:49 AM Reply Quote 0
                                    • S
                                      Setarcos @bk150
                                      last edited by Aug 5, 2021, 7:49 AM

                                      I am not sure if it matters, but both @bk150 and @slk2k are using CE 2.5.2 and I am using Plus 21.05. @jerseymike what were you running when you did your test with the single port QNAP I225-LM cards?

                                      J 1 Reply Last reply Aug 5, 2021, 11:17 AM Reply Quote 0
                                      • J
                                        jerseymike @Setarcos
                                        last edited by Aug 5, 2021, 11:17 AM

                                        @setarcos I'm running CE 2.5.2

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • S
                                          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator @bk150
                                          last edited by Aug 5, 2021, 11:52 AM

                                          @bk150 said in Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?:

                                          I reinstalled 2.5.2 and disabled hardware offloading and now everything is working great.

                                          Hardware Checksum Offloading? Using the GUI checkbox?

                                          B 1 Reply Last reply Aug 5, 2021, 1:38 PM Reply Quote 0
                                          34 out of 189
                                          • First post
                                            34/189
                                            Last post
                                          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.