From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jun 14 23:12:08 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id XAA26638
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 14 Jun 1995 23:12:08 -0700
Received: from asstdc.scgt.oz.au (root@asstdc.scgt.oz.au [202.14.234.65])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id XAA26631
          for <freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com>; Wed, 14 Jun 1995 23:11:59 -0700
Received: (from imb@localhost)
	by asstdc.scgt.oz.au (8.6.12/BSD4.4)
	id QAA19090; Thu, 15 Jun 1995 16:09:32 +1000
From: michael butler <imb@scgt.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199506150609.QAA19090@asstdc.scgt.oz.au>
Subject: Re: ah1542 speed optimization
To: julian@ref.tfs.com (Julian Elischer)
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1995 16:09:31 +1000 (EST)
Cc: kuku@gilberto.physik.rwth-aachen.de, freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com
In-Reply-To: <199506141755.KAA06766@ref.tfs.com> from "Julian Elischer" at Jun 14, 95 10:55:13 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24beta]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 258       
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Julian Elischer writes:

> > (I was asking why the table aha_speeds did not show the
> > 125 ns in that prev mail)
 
> it won't fall back to an entry not in the table....

This begs the question .. what is the appropriate value for 125ns .. 0x90 ?

	michael