Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:08:52 -0700
From:      Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh@gmail.com>
To:        Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@semihalf.com>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: mge, mii/e1000phy
Message-ID:  <20090923170852.GA1099@michelle.cdnetworks.com>
In-Reply-To: <4ABA2C08.3070504@semihalf.com>
References:  <20090922235350.GB1520@michelle.cdnetworks.com> <97F7ED67-AB93-4897-893B-16D3B22F9EB3@semihalf.com> <4ABA2C08.3070504@semihalf.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 04:09:12PM +0200, Grzegorz Bernacki wrote:
> >>From: Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh@gmail.com>
> >>Date: 23 wrze?nia 2009 01:53:50 CEST
> >>To: Kristof Provost <kristof@sigsegv.be>
> >>Cc: current@freebsd.org
> >>Subject: Re: mge, mii/e1000phy
> >>Reply-To: pyunyh@gmail.com
> >>
> >>>- Forcing the mge driver to IFM_100_TX (in mge_set_port_serial_control)
> >>>  does work. The system manages to acquire a DHCP address.
> >>
> >>Would you also show me the output of "ifconfig -m mge0"?
> >>
> >>I'm not author of mge(4) so I'm not familiar with mge(4). But it
> >>seems that mge(4) lacks link state change handler. Normally NICs
> >>are required to reprogram MAC to match resolved speed/duplex/
> >>flow-control of link when it know it established a valid link which
> >>is notified from mii(4).
> >
> 
> Hi,
> 
> You are right. Link state change handler is missing in mge(4) driver. It 
> is on our TODO list for this driver and will be implemented soon.
> 

I've briefly looked over MV88F5182 opensource community
programmer's user guide and found that ENQ bit of TQC register
should be set again whenever link DOWN/UP event is detected which
in turn may complicate the driver as it may have to reset its
descriptor indexes. And I guess it's wrong to spin wait until link
is established in mge_init_locked(). The datasheet says Rx checksum
offloading capability but can't find more information for that.
Another nice looking feature that lacks in mge(4) would be
interrupt coalescing. And I guess interrupt coalescing feature
would give better performance than polling(4).

> grzesiek
> 



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090923170852.GA1099>