From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 14:26:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 14:25:47 -0400 Received: from shell.cyberus.ca ([209.195.95.7]:38586 "EHLO shell.cyberus.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 14:25:36 -0400 Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 14:23:04 -0400 (EDT) From: jamal To: Ben Greear cc: Simon Kirby , Ingo Molnar , , Alexey Kuznetsov , Robert Olsson , Benjamin LaHaise , , Alan Cox Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5 In-Reply-To: <3BBC8692.9F48DA85@candelatech.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Ben Greear wrote: > jamal wrote: > > > > On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Ben Greear wrote: > > > > > The tulip driver only started working for my DLINK 4-port NIC after > > > about 2.4.8, and last I checked the ZYNX 4-port still refuses to work, > > > so I wouldn't consider it a paradigm of stability and grace quite yet. > > > > The tests in www.cyberus.ca/~hadi/247-res/ were done with 4-port znyx > > cards using 2.4.7. > > What kind of problems are you having? Maybe i can help. > > Mostly problems with auto-negotiation it seems. Earlier 2.4 kernels > just would never go 100bt/FD. Later (broken) versions would claim to > be 100bt/FD, but they still showed lots of collisions and frame errors. > > I'll try the ZYNX on the latest kernel in the next few days and let you > know what I find... Please do. > > > My point is that the API exists. Driver owners could use it; this > > discussion seems to have at least helped to point in the existence of the > > API. Alexey had the hardware flow control in there since 2.1.x .., us > > that at least. In my opinion, Ingos patch is radical enough to be allowed > > in when we are approaching stability. And it is a lazy way of solving the > > problem > > The API has been there since 2.1.x, and yet few drivers support it? I > can see why Ingo decided to fix the problem generically. That logic is convoluted. > > > cat /proc/net/softnet_stat > > > 2b85c320 0000d374 6524ce48 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 0$ > > > 2b8b5e29 0000d615 653eba32 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 0$ > > So you're priting out counters in HEX?? This seems one place where a nice > base-10 number would be appropriate :) Its mostly for formating reasons: 2b85c320 is 730186528 (and wont fit in one line) cheers, jamal