Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 16:47:59 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 166724] if_re(4): watchdog timeout Message-ID: <bug-166724-7501-j5vJFq5pjB@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-166724-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-166724-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D166724 --- Comment #113 from Richard Russo <freebsd@ruka.org> --- (In reply to Mahmoud Al-Qudsi from comment #112) > In the four years since, there have been no complaints of any regressions= or other issues caused by using the vendor-patched version of the driver o= r the ports net/realtek-re-kmod repackagement of it. As I reported above, the vendor driver emits ethernet pause frames, which is undesirable on my network; and it's not configurable. Of course, being unab= le to send or receive frames is worse; but the opaque nature of the vendor dri= ver makes it hard to do any refinement. When I saw the vendor driver is opaque, look at the function re_enable_EEE (line 8087). That's a whole lot of probably important hardware configuration that we have no idea what's going on for. That said, perhaps the watchdog message could be adjusted to refer to this = bug or the realtek-re-kmod port. Or maybe the vendor could be persuaded to rele= ase more details about their hardware? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-166724-7501-j5vJFq5pjB>