From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 23 16:47:26 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3EF216A4CF for ; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 16:47:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cydem.org (S0106000103ce4c9c.ed.shawcable.net [68.149.254.167]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F2C543D5F for ; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 16:47:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from soralx@cydem.org) Received: from S01060020ed3972ba.ed.shawcable.net (S01060020ed3972ba.ed.shawcable.net [68.149.254.42]) by cydem.org (Postfix/FreeBSD) with ESMTP id 2521A383C5 for ; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:47:26 -0600 (MDT) From: To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:47:44 -0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <200410132110.09915.soralx@cydem.org> <200410220216.54868.soralx@cydem.org> <20041022175311.GA15960@odin.ac.hmc.edu> In-Reply-To: <20041022175311.GA15960@odin.ac.hmc.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200410231047.44788.soralx@cydem.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Linksys PCM200 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 16:47:27 -0000 > If you have done any testing, that should be sufficent. I've done a little testing under various loads. The driver switches chip to store and forward mode soon during initial use after attaching (I also get few messages about watchdog timeouts together with "increasing TX threshold"). But it seems to work OK. I haven't done any serious performance testing (maximum speed it could reach was ~ 5Mb/s on 100baseTX/FD) nor attach/detach tests. > After all, the > hardware didn't work before, right? yes, it wasn't recognized before > It did work before that's another > issue, but if not, all that matters is that we don't break any other > cards. I don't see a way how it could break other cards' functionality - should be no concerns here > > I suggest that you change the description to: > > "Linksys PCM200 EtherFast 10/100 CardBus NIC, v.03 (ADMtek Centaur-C)" > > > > Card's versions differ between each other significantly. Also, there will > > be no easy way to find out card's chipset if it won't be stated in the > > description. > > The string will fit on console even better: > > > > dc0: > Centaur-C)> port 0x1000-0x10ff mem 0x88002000-0x880023ff irq 9 at device > > 0.0 on cardbus1 > > I disagree. If you need that level fo detail, you should use pciconf > -lv. I don't see a real reson not to use more complete description. There are few resons to use it: 0. More info is _always_ better. In any case, the message will take 2 lines on console, so shortening the description will not gain anything 1. the description in `pciconf -lv` does not show card's version and chipset 2. when PCI IDs for previous card versions will be added, the description will need to be changed anyway to include the version number Timestamp: 0x417A853C [SorAlx] http://cydem.org.ua/ ridin' VN1500-B2