From owner-freebsd-hardware  Mon Sep 15 09:48:12 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hardware>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id JAA08665
          for hardware-outgoing; Mon, 15 Sep 1997 09:48:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nemesis.idirect.com (root@nemesis.idirect.com [207.136.80.40])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08651
          for <freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org>; Mon, 15 Sep 1997 09:48:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from thor.idirect.com (jlixfeld@thor.idirect.com [207.136.80.105])
          by nemesis.idirect.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id MAA08539; Mon, 15 Sep 1997 12:48:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (jlixfeld@localhost) by thor.idirect.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA18869; Mon, 15 Sep 1997 12:48:01 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: thor.idirect.com: jlixfeld owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 12:48:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jason Lixfeld <jlixfeld@idirect.com>
To: Jim Shankland <jas@flyingfox.com>
cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: DLINK 21140 Card
In-Reply-To: <199709151638.JAA12987@biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.94.970915124738.17056E-100000@thor.idirect.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Okay, well I adjusted the level from 128 to 48 (to match RXDESC) and it is
looking good so far.

On Mon, 15 Sep 1997, Jim Shankland wrote:

> >From jlixfeld@idirect.com Mon Sep 15 06:04:06 1997
> X-Authentication-Warning: thor.idirect.com: jlixfeld owned process doing -bs
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 09:07:35 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Jason Lixfeld <jlixfeld@idirect.com>
> To: Jim Shankland <jas@flyingfox.com>
> cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: DLINK 21140 Card
> In-Reply-To: <199709150503.WAA05355@biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> 
> Jason Lixfeld <jlixfeld@idirect.com> writes:
> 
> > I'm not sure if it will work or not, but I'm going to change it
> > to match TULIP_RXDESCS.  That is set to 48.  I'm not sure if it
> > will let me, or if it will even run.  If you think not, let me
> > know.  If I should change it to 32, should I not change RX to
> > 32 from 48 just to keep things symmetrical?!
> > 
> > On Sun, 14 Sep 1997, Jim Shankland wrote:
> > 
> > > Try reducing the value of TULIP_TXDESCS from 128 to 32, recompile the
> > > driver, and see if that helps; please report back either way.
> > > 
> > > Jim Shankland
> > > Flying Fox Computer Systems, Inc.
> 
> The important thing for the purpose of this experiment is to reduce
> the size of the tulip_softc structure to < 4 KB.  The number of TXDESCS
> and RXDESCS need not be the same.
> 
> When the size of the tulip_softc structure is > 4 KB, it is possible to
> see failures quite similar to what you are seeing.  On the other hand,
> your problem might be entirely unrelated.
> 
> Jim Shankland
> Flying Fox Computer Systems, Inc.
>