<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>P-SeriesのトピックRe: Packet loss on eTSEC controller (P1020RDB)</title>
    <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/P-Series/Packet-loss-on-eTSEC-controller-P1020RDB/m-p/289693#M960</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Please see below technical support comment:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Based on this information it is not possible to figure out the root cause of the problem. PING is a user-level utility that accesses the network through the services provided by the IP stack, which is not implemented in Freescale hardware. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If you believe that the problem is related to eTSEC hardware, please provide a hardware level problem description, namely:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1. Actions taken by the software with respect to eTSE&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Courier New';"&gt;С&lt;/SPAN&gt; (register or shared memory structure&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; updates) that immediately precede the problem manifestation and/or suspected to &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; cause the problem.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. Observed response of the hardware (if any) to the actions specified in p. 1 and why&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; this response is considered incorrect.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3. Any explicit error indications returned by eTSEC in BDs and IEVENT.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 00:58:17 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>lunminliang</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2013-05-03T00:58:17Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Packet loss on eTSEC controller (P1020RDB)</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/P-Series/Packet-loss-on-eTSEC-controller-P1020RDB/m-p/289692#M959</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've ran into a strange issue with eTSEC controller on P1020RDB. It seems like there's a fair amount of packet loss when I PING my target. PING with smaller payloads are okay but the problem becomes severe when I try to use a ping with 1024 bytes payload.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;While troubleshooting the issue, It seems like the packets are being properly received by the controller but response packets are not transferred on the wire by eTSEC. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Here's some info about my environment.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Tx and Rx buffers are 8-byte aligned.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;I've checked the RMON MIB registers and there's no collision / overflow / underflow condition.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;The data buffers and descriptors are being updated properly.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;PING with smaller payload is working properly.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'll appreciate your comments.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:56:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/P-Series/Packet-loss-on-eTSEC-controller-P1020RDB/m-p/289692#M959</guid>
      <dc:creator>ayazshahid</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-04-29T14:56:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Packet loss on eTSEC controller (P1020RDB)</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/P-Series/Packet-loss-on-eTSEC-controller-P1020RDB/m-p/289693#M960</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Please see below technical support comment:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Based on this information it is not possible to figure out the root cause of the problem. PING is a user-level utility that accesses the network through the services provided by the IP stack, which is not implemented in Freescale hardware. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If you believe that the problem is related to eTSEC hardware, please provide a hardware level problem description, namely:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1. Actions taken by the software with respect to eTSE&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Courier New';"&gt;С&lt;/SPAN&gt; (register or shared memory structure&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; updates) that immediately precede the problem manifestation and/or suspected to &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; cause the problem.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. Observed response of the hardware (if any) to the actions specified in p. 1 and why&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; this response is considered incorrect.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3. Any explicit error indications returned by eTSEC in BDs and IEVENT.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 00:58:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/P-Series/Packet-loss-on-eTSEC-controller-P1020RDB/m-p/289693#M960</guid>
      <dc:creator>lunminliang</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-05-03T00:58:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

