From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Apr 1 21:00:01 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id VAA22697 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 21:00:01 -0800 Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.1]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA22685 for ; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 20:59:55 -0800 Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin.Root.COM [198.145.90.18]) by Root.COM (8.6.8/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA20914; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 20:59:29 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.11/8.6.5) with SMTP id UAA00129; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 20:59:29 -0800 Message-Id: <199504020459.UAA00129@corbin.Root.COM> X-Authentication-Warning: corbin.Root.COM: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol To: Luigi Rizzo cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: NE2000 Plus performance In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 31 Mar 95 18:54:59 +0200." <199503311655.SAA04685@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> From: David Greenman Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM Date: Sat, 01 Apr 1995 20:59:19 -0800 Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >Poking around with the configuration program of our ethernet cards >(NE2000 clones manufactured by Trust), I found out that they have a mode >(called NE2000 plus) in which they apparently use shared memory (at >least, the setup menu asks you to select a memory address. > >Is this mode supported by the current if_ed driver, and is it documented >anywhere ? (I am asking because I remember discussion on the relative >performance of WD80x3 -- better, using shared memory -- and NE2000 -- >slower, with programmed IO) It's not supported. I didn't even know of the NE2000+ existence until you mentioned here. -DG