PINE64 - Kinda upset at the lack of response to GBe issues

Well, we know that for a short time (due to parts shortages) they used another vendor's chip. What we need to do is identify the vendor's ieee assigned prefix.

Did you try a mac address that at least turns off the local bit ?

Second least-significant bit was 0.

Well, I think I'm making progress here.

... I have two boards (out of three) of which I am able to discuss; one of them GbE works, and one of them GbE does not work ! Blush

Pine(A) GbE works; Pine(B) GbE does not work.

(First off, both boards function, and both boards do 10/100 perfectly)

Pine(A) 410640133576 00:06:dc:8b:c4:0f 'GREEN' [GbE Works] (data below)

RTL8211E G2K40P2 GG10B

201-A64DB110-02 A64-DB-V1.1 2G
C1600358 04.11 <----------------- note difference
CFL _ _ _ X _

Pine(B) 410640138448 00:06:dc:8b:d7:17 'GREEN' [GbE does not work]

RTL8211E G3E16P1 GG128

201-A64DB110-02 A64-DB-V1.1 2G
C160358 04.12 <---------------- note difference
CFL _ _ _ X _

The following data from iperf shows debian running iperf client to Lenovo T61 Mint Linux iperf server:

harmar@PineA64:~$ iperf -c 192.168.1.16 -t 160 -i 10
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 192.168.1.16, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 54.1 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 192.168.1.236 port 43515 connected with 192.168.1.16 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 254 MBytes 213 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 10.0-20.0 sec 254 MBytes 213 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 20.0-30.0 sec 241 MBytes 202 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 30.0-40.0 sec 236 MBytes 198 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 40.0-50.0 sec 247 MBytes 208 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 50.0-60.0 sec 198 MBytes 166 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 60.0-70.0 sec 195 MBytes 164 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 70.0-80.0 sec 214 MBytes 179 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 80.0-90.0 sec 303 MBytes 254 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 90.0-100.0 sec 181 MBytes 152 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 100.0-110.0 sec 173 MBytes 145 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 110.0-120.0 sec 212 MBytes 177 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 120.0-130.0 sec 256 MBytes 215 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 130.0-140.0 sec 293 MBytes 246 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 140.0-150.0 sec 323 MBytes 271 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 150.0-160.0 sec 275 MBytes 231 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 0.0-160.0 sec 3.77 GBytes 202 Mbits/sec
harmar@PineA64:~$

The following data shows ubuntu (same card) running iperf client to T61 linux iperf server:

harmar@PineA64B:~$ iperf -c 192.168.1.16 -t 160 -i 10
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 192.168.1.16, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 67.6 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 192.168.1.239 port 57678 connected with 192.168.1.16 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 470 MBytes 394 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 10.0-20.0 sec 296 MBytes 248 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 20.0-30.0 sec 496 MBytes 416 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 30.0-40.0 sec 503 MBytes 422 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 40.0-50.0 sec 526 MBytes 441 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 50.0-60.0 sec 472 MBytes 396 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 60.0-70.0 sec 484 MBytes 406 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 70.0-80.0 sec 451 MBytes 379 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 80.0-90.0 sec 508 MBytes 426 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 90.0-100.0 sec 454 MBytes 381 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 100.0-110.0 sec 503 MBytes 422 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 110.0-120.0 sec 518 MBytes 434 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 120.0-130.0 sec 511 MBytes 429 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 130.0-140.0 sec 528 MBytes 443 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 140.0-150.0 sec 506 MBytes 424 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 150.0-160.0 sec 430 MBytes 361 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 0.0-160.0 sec 7.48 GBytes 401 Mbits/sec
harmar@PineA64B:~$

All of this used the following setup:

all short cat6 cables 1M
Lenovo Mint Linux T61 notebook server ( iperf -s )
ubuntu & debian builds (alternately running on both pine boards as iperf -c clients)
ipv4 disabled
mac addresses as listed above, local bit set off

I will update the poll shortly; some slight more testing to do first--- for now, I have one board that functions with GbE and one board that does not function with GbE. The more of these we can find the better. My boards differ in that the one that does not work has a later serial number and is marked [ 04.12 ] where-as the board that GbE functions is an earlier serial number and is marked [ 04.11 ].

So, still frustrating, yet making progress.

These numbers were obtained using the working board Pine(A) , ubuntu , while running on battery... I almost doubled my numbers; this is repeatable !

harmar@PineA64:~$ iperf -c 192.168.1.16 -t 160 -i 10
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 192.168.1.16, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 45.1 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 192.168.1.239 port 57735 connected with 192.168.1.16 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 728 MBytes 611 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 10.0-20.0 sec 652 MBytes 547 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 20.0-30.0 sec 643 MBytes 539 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 30.0-40.0 sec 605 MBytes 507 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 40.0-50.0 sec 649 MBytes 544 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 50.0-60.0 sec 607 MBytes 509 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 60.0-70.0 sec 670 MBytes 562 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 70.0-80.0 sec 612 MBytes 513 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 80.0-90.0 sec 644 MBytes 540 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 90.0-100.0 sec 642 MBytes 539 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 100.0-110.0 sec 554 MBytes 465 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 110.0-120.0 sec 618 MBytes 518 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 120.0-130.0 sec 601 MBytes 504 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 130.0-140.0 sec 566 MBytes 475 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 140.0-150.0 sec 596 MBytes 500 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 150.0-160.0 sec 557 MBytes 468 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 0.0-160.0 sec 9.71 GBytes 521 Mbits/sec
harmar@PineA64B:~$

... and this even though my ac power feed is filtered ! Aparently not filtered engouh for 1Gb.

(08-20-2016, 10:01 PM)amc2012 Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, I had gone to try longsleep's fix (he wrote to me this morning), but I am one of the lucky ones who does not have a MAC address on the bottom of my PINE. Only have a serial #. So no dice for me.

If you want to try a complete MAC, you can use the one off my board, since it's only used at the LAN level... 0006dc8b50a6

Although, since you tired the first six characters, I doubt the rest will make any difference.

Hey MarkHaysHarris777... making me jealous now... you have 2Gb pine64s... and I only have a 1Gb one! Sad

btw, the V1.1 is the same on my 1G board, but the different number you've highlighted on your two boards is 03.17 on mine... maybe it's a Month.Date of manufacture code?

(08-21-2016, 01:42 AM)pfeerick Wrote: [ -> ]btw, the V1.1 is the same on my 1G board, but the different number you've highlighted on your two boards is 03.17 on mine... maybe it's a Month.Date of manufacture code?

That's my guess as well.

Makes sense. Mine is 05.17, as stated in the poll thread. I got mine very late, despite being a February backer, so the 05.17 seems accurate.

I have two boards (both 2GB with wifi/bt). One works when set at 1000Mb/s. One does not work well (sporadic). I run ubuntu on the one that works and debian on the one that does not (however it does work consistently when I run at 100Mb/s).

What information can I provide that may be useful diagnostically? (and where is the poll that is mentioned?)

(08-24-2016, 05:16 PM)blairac Wrote: [ -> ]I have two boards (both 2GB with wifi/bt). One works when set at 1000Mb/s. One does not work well (sporadic). I run ubuntu on the one that works and debian on the one that does not (however it does work consistently when I run at 100Mb/s).

What information can I provide that may be useful diagnostically? (and where is the poll that is mentioned?)

The poll is at this link.

... take the poll, then read the first post (below the poll) and provide your data... both the card that works and the card that does not work. You can vote twice, so if you have one that works, great report it. I you have one that does not work, that's good too... report that !

(08-24-2016, 07:59 PM)MarkHaysHarris777 Wrote: [ -> ]You can vote twice.

No, you can't. Once you've voted (once), you can only see the results of the poll. That doesn't stop you from commenting in that thread multiple times, or indicating that with the same SD image, but with two difference devices, you get different results, etc.

(08-24-2016, 09:22 PM)pfeerick Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-24-2016, 07:59 PM)MarkHaysHarris777 Wrote: [ -> ]You can vote twice.

No, you can't. Once you've voted (once), you can only see the results of the poll. That doesn't stop you from commenting in that thread multiple times, or indicating that with the same SD image, but with two difference devices, you get different results, etc.

I built the poll. I also edited the poll, to allow for multiple votes (2).

... this when I realized that some folks (like myself) have multiple boards, some which work, and some that do not.