C10 Bidirectional Breakout Board

I was never that lucky! I use 5.10 on my milling machine but it runs ethercat devices which has vastly more efficient TCP protocols in its fieldbus technology so its better dealing with network latency.

I could never get 5.x to work with Mesa with the network hardware I had.

Actually I just checked my plasma table and it is also 5.10 but with a 7i96.

FWIW they both have Realtek NIC's.

5.x had issues with Intel NIC's, and that is technicaly not an issue at all, it is just proper support for hardware, granted it defaulted to adding some latency to network communications, that could have been changed.
For normal use, nobody ever noticed any difference between 4.x 5.x or 6.x.
We did, we had a warning telling us the machine is on it's own and out of our control!
-
I have machines running 4.x, 5.x, 6.x with Intel and RealTek NIC's, even one with Marvel NIC that can check network wires from BIOS, but it's quite old.
PCW's advice to set coalescing to 0 works always for me.

tommylight wrote:

For normal use, nobody ever noticed any difference between 4.x 5.x or 6.x.
 

Thats the thing, because there was never a linuxcnc ISO for Debian Bullseye (which was 5.10), very few people went to the trouble of compiling from source in the absence of packages on the 5.x kernel. So the adoption of the 5.x kernel was not widespread.

It wasn't until people started to try the Bookworm packages that widespread problems  were reported. From memory, early Bookworm kernels started at about 5.15 and are noww at 6.10. I've lost count how many people have thanked me for solving their error finishing read issues with my instructions (and using prebuilt 6.3 kernel as a last resort).