From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 16 01:04:00 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 573C916A46F; Tue, 16 May 2006 01:04:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from mrout2-b.corp.dcn.yahoo.com (mrout2-b.corp.dcn.yahoo.com [216.109.112.28]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6B0843D48; Tue, 16 May 2006 01:03:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from minion.local.neville-neil.com (proxy7.corp.yahoo.com [216.145.48.98]) by mrout2-b.corp.dcn.yahoo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4/y.out) with ESMTP id k4G13gPA002107; Mon, 15 May 2006 18:03:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 18:03:42 -0700 Message-ID: From: gnn@FreeBSD.org To: Makoto Matsushita In-Reply-To: <4468534B.6050607@jp.FreeBSD.org> References: <200605140147.k4E1lqGD083037@repoman.freebsd.org> <4467A5CE.7070900@FreeBSD.org> <4468534B.6050607@jp.FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.8 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Shij=F2?=) APEL/10.6 Emacs/22.0.50 (i386-apple-darwin8.5.1) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Maxim Sobolev , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/lnc if_lnc.c if_lnc_cbus.c if_lnc_isa.c if_lnc_pci.c if_lncreg.h if_lncvar.h X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 01:04:00 -0000 At Mon, 15 May 2006 19:09:15 +0900, Makoto Matsushita wrote: > > > Does it work on VmWare? > > If my quick test (7-current, build a new kernel without lnc(4), boot -s, > kldload if_le, and dhclient le0) is not wrong, le(4) works fine for me. Yes, and it has better/more regular performance. lnc always had a skip when doing ping for (.5ms vs 1.5ms). The le driver has also been fixed, from what I'm told, to not have the problem of losing a packet to a reset under load. I have nnot tested it under load but I trust the author of le who I've been mailing wiht off list. Part of the motivation for removing lnc was that le could be a replacement, in particular on VMWare. Later, George