I ran a test here in the lab and was not able to reproduce the issue you're describing. My setup is with 2 systems connected through a 100Mbit switch. Client runs Windows XP and the server is Linux RHEL5 with updated samba 3.0.26a (latest I could download from samba.org).
I was able to copy 1GB zip file back and forth and also decompress it from/to the shared drive without data corruption. Have you looked into the data corruption - what is the difference between the files? If the files have the same size you should be able to see the diff with hexdump for example. Could you provide your samba config? Thanks, Emil -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of L F Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 9:32 AM To: Florian Weimer Cc: Urs Thuermann; Bill Fink; Brandeburg, Jesse; Kok, Auke-jan H; James Chapman; netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: e1000 driver and samba This is the latest ethtool -S : beehive:~# ethtool -S eth4 NIC statistics: rx_packets: 33491526 tx_packets: 41410384 rx_bytes: 28384277429 tx_bytes: 46178788616 rx_broadcast: 3144 tx_broadcast: 2068 rx_multicast: 79 tx_multicast: 0 rx_errors: 0 tx_errors: 0 tx_dropped: 0 multicast: 79 collisions: 0 rx_length_errors: 0 rx_over_errors: 0 rx_crc_errors: 0 rx_frame_errors: 0 rx_no_buffer_count: 0 rx_missed_errors: 0 tx_aborted_errors: 0 tx_carrier_errors: 0 tx_fifo_errors: 0 tx_heartbeat_errors: 0 tx_window_errors: 0 tx_abort_late_coll: 0 tx_deferred_ok: 36256 tx_single_coll_ok: 0 tx_multi_coll_ok: 0 tx_timeout_count: 0 tx_restart_queue: 0 rx_long_length_errors: 0 rx_short_length_errors: 0 rx_align_errors: 0 tx_tcp_seg_good: 0 tx_tcp_seg_failed: 0 rx_flow_control_xon: 37420 rx_flow_control_xoff: 37420 tx_flow_control_xon: 0 tx_flow_control_xoff: 0 rx_long_byte_count: 28384277429 rx_csum_offload_good: 33478553 rx_csum_offload_errors: 0 rx_header_split: 0 alloc_rx_buff_failed: 0 tx_smbus: 0 rx_smbus: 0 dropped_smbus: 0 There have been no further deferred frames, in accordance to what was posted above. However, as Urs very correctly points out, the problem is still very much there. I am waiting for new and improved cables (third batch) to see if that makes a difference. I am also wondering if, perhaps, a layer3 managed switch with port statistics may prove helpful. To answer Bill's questions, memtest+ 1.70 was run overnight, it totalled some fifty passes with no errors. I know that some maintain that memtest is not a definitive RAM test, but it certainly catches most problems. As to the disk side of the equation, that is of course a possible concern and I will be running a second, more intensive batch of tests. However, the fact that virtualbox (running on the server) reports no errors despite running through significant amounts of data (10GB+, passing through samba via the tap device that is bridged to the problematic ethernet) every day makes me fairly confident that the disk side of the equation is not where the problem lies. LF - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
