From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Mar 10 09:29:20 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA06161 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 09:29:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from labinfo.iet.unipi.it (labinfo.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.5]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA06077 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 09:29:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (luigi@localhost) by labinfo.iet.unipi.it (8.6.5/8.6.5) id RAA26860; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 17:44:52 +0100 From: Luigi Rizzo Message-Id: <199703101644.RAA26860@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Subject: Re: Q about 100Mb ether cards To: dg@root.com Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 17:44:52 +0100 (MET) Cc: bag@sinbin.demos.su, hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199703101424.GAA17192@root.com> from "David Greenman" at Mar 10, 97 06:24:26 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > been able to get it to work. The Pro/100B is well supported; it's what I'm > using in wcarchive and I haven't had any problems. It consumes about half > the CPU time that the de driver does and has about the same level of that's curious though, since both do DMA from/to mbufs. What CPU overhead are we talking about, 1% or 10% ? Any idea on what to look at in the de driver to improve performance ? Since I have spent a few days on it, I am moderately familiar with that code now. Luigi -----------------------------+-------------------------------------- Luigi Rizzo | Dip. di Ingegneria dell'Informazione email: luigi@iet.unipi.it | Universita' di Pisa tel: +39-50-568533 | via Diotisalvi 2, 56126 PISA (Italy) fax: +39-50-568522 | http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ _____________________________|______________________________________