Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 02:00:01 -0800 (PST) From: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/10535: Very poor ethernet performance with tx driver Message-ID: <199903111000.CAA47317@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/10535; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com> To: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> Cc: peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, jeremyp@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au, andreas@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/10535: Very poor ethernet performance with tx driver Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 10:52:12 +0100 On Thu, Mar 11, 1999 at 09:31:39AM +0000, Doug Rabson wrote: > [I've added andreas to the Cc since he committed the last change to the > driver] > > The fix looks correct to me but as DG noted when the last change was made > to this driver, it should be using DELAY to avoid future problems with > processor speeds. There are a couple of other places I noticed for loops > which should also use DELAY - epic_read_phy_register and > epic_write_phy_register. > > If these are changed to call DELAY(1) in the loop, I think the original > patch to increase the loop in epic_init_phy wouldn't be needed either. I have no idea. what delays are actually needed, lack of experience in driver programming. Would it be save to simply use (copy) the DELAY values from another, let's say the fxp, driver. Perhaps Semen you or Semen has an idea ?! Andreas /// -- Andreas Klemm http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/~andreas What gives you 90% more speed, for example, in kernel compilation ? http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/~fsmp/SMP/akgraph-a/graph1.html "NT = Not Today" (Maggie Biggs) ``powered by FreeBSD SMP'' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903111000.CAA47317>