From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Mar 10 19:20:23 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA21780 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 19:20:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.futuresouth.com (mail.futuresouth.com [207.141.254.21]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA21758 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 19:20:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from shell.futuresouth.com (shell.futuresouth.com [207.141.254.20]) by mail.futuresouth.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA04922; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 21:20:04 -0600 (CST) From: Tim Tsai Received: (from tim@localhost) by shell.futuresouth.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) id VAA04042; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 21:20:03 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199703110320.VAA04042@shell.futuresouth.com> Subject: Re: performance (was: 100 Mb/s cards) To: dg@root.com Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 21:20:03 -0600 (CST) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199703110024.QAA18376@root.com> from David Greenman at "Mar 10, 97 04:24:49 pm" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Regarding the difference in performance between the de and fxp drivers, > all I can say to this is that the code paths in the de driver are long and > complicated. It's entirely likely that they have to be this way for whatever > reason (I've not looked into improving it). The time reduction I measured with > the fxp driver was primarily %interrupt, but there is a reduction in system > time as well (too difficult to measure accuraterly on wcarchive, but perhaps > 5-10%). Perhaps this can be reflected in the supported hardware file, especially a note about 21140-AC based cards. I bought these cards based on the hardware list and also by comments that these cards are going to be supported soon (that was 3 months ago), well, that hasn't turned out to be the case. The least we can do is to prevent others from making the same mistake. Tim