From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Mar 4 09:20:36 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA01566 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 09:20:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA01558 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 09:20:33 -0800 (PST) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id KAA09946; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 10:14:58 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199703041714.KAA09946@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: [driver testing] Odd network behaviour? To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 10:14:58 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, hackers@FreeBSD.org, jrb@cs.pdx.edu In-Reply-To: <199703040020.KAA08716@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at Mar 4, 97 10:50:03 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] 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 > > Kurt Mahon, who wrote the driver for the 82586 for USL, claimed that > > the USL driver copied the data twice; apparently, the interrupt was > > issued when data was available, rather than when it had made it into > > card memory? > > This is a most extremely bizarre claim. AFAIK, the '586 doesn't issue > an interrupt until the DMA into the host memory has completed, which has to > happen as the frame arrives as (again from memory) it doesn't have a very > big internal FIFO. > > *grumble* Well, you'll note the quetion mark... that's the reasoning I remember being given. I also rememeber SVR4.0.2 running fine on the cards on the 6386/33E's, but failing to work for 386BSD (up through FreeBSD). Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.