rl(4) TX_UNDERRUN fix
max at love2party.net
Mon Feb 21 11:40:23 PST 2005
On Monday 21 February 2005 19:45, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> Hi all,
> please test http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/~joerg/if_rl.c.diff
> with any kind of rl(4). This patch is a more aggressive version
> of the recently commited patch in FreeBSD 5/6, the version
> orginaly proposed in kern/61448.
> It shouldn't negatively impact performance or stability.
I choose the less aggressive one for a (couple of) reason(s):
- not all chips can RL_TXCFG_CLRABRT some even forbid it in the specs.
- the ifp->if_opackets++ just isn't right. You should only increase it if you
- removing the reset/init cycle *might* be a good thing, but only if you can
assure that it doesn't break the older chips. Some notes in the specs
/"\ Best regards, | mlaier at xxxxxxxxxxx
\ / Max Laier | ICQ #67774661
X http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/ | mlaier at EFnet
/ \ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Against HTML Mail and News
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: "Description: PGP signature"
More information about the Submit