From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Apr 10 13:52:32 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 7257D37B404
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:52:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.pair.com (relay.pair.com [209.68.1.20])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4CBB543FAF
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:52:31 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from silby@silby.com)
Received: (qmail 51717 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2003 20:52:29 -0000
Received: from niwun.pair.com (HELO localhost) (209.68.2.70)
  by relay.pair.com with SMTP; 10 Apr 2003 20:52:29 -0000
X-pair-Authenticated: 209.68.2.70
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:48:56 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>
To: harti@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <20030410181322.W774@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <20030410164758.B695@odysseus.silby.com>
References: <20030409114957.GN83126@cicely9.cicely.de>   
	<20030410113602.K472@odysseus.silby.com>
	<20030410181322.W774@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
cc: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>
Subject: Re: realtime problem
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:52:32 -0000


On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Harti Brandt wrote:

> This is a 3com and has an exphy, which in turn uses ukphy_status.
>
> The timing is the same (960usec), because it never takes the first return.
> Should it?
>
> harti

Yes, it should take the early return I added, which is what I think it did
for my 3Com cards, back when I tested it.  You might want to add some
debug code and poke at it more, because the benefits were huge when I
tried it.

Mike "Silby" Silbersack