Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 12:19:21 -0400 From: "Jim McGrath" <jimmcgra@bellatlantic.net> To: "Petri Helenius" <pete@he.iki.fi>, "Luigi Rizzo" <rizzo@icir.org> Cc: "Lars Eggert" <larse@ISI.EDU>, <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>, <freebsdnic@mailbox.cps.intel.com> Subject: RE: ENOBUFS Message-ID: <NDBBKKEELKBCJJBEGDECEEHMCGAA.jimmcgra@bellatlantic.net> In-Reply-To: <00b001c276ba$1533dbf0$3500080a@PHE>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The chips I have are 82546. Is your recommendation to steer away > from Intel > Gigabit Ethernet chips? What would be more optimal alternative? > The 82543/82544 chips worked well in vanilla configurations. I never played with an 82546. The em driver is supported by Intel, so any chip features it uses should be safe. When testing with a SmartBits, 64 byte packets and high line utilization, I ran into problems when RIDV was enabled. This may be fixed with the 82546, but I have no way of verifying this. > Maybe IŽll play with the value and see what happens. Any comments on > the question how to access the adapter structure from userland? > We added sysctls to the wx driver to allow tuning/testing of various parameters. The same could be done to the em driver. You will likely need to do more than just modify fields in the adapter structure. The control register you are targeting will need to be rewritten by the sysctl. Jim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?NDBBKKEELKBCJJBEGDECEEHMCGAA.jimmcgra>