Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 14:18:08 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com> Cc: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: if_fxp driver info Message-ID: <20010126141808.D1222@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20010125125417.L29115@prism.flugsvamp.com>; from jlemon@flugsvamp.com on Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 12:54:17PM -0600 References: <local.mail.freebsd-hackers/5.0.0.25.0.20010124170245.03bf6140@mail.etinc.com> <local.mail.freebsd-hackers/Your <local.mail.freebsd-hackers/200101232007.MAA18988@implode.root.com> <local.mail.freebsd-hackers/200101232033.f0NKXHS01892@mass.dis.org> <200101250358.f0P3w8g49073@prism.flugsvamp.com> <5.0.0.25.0.20010125130845.030de0f0@mail.etinc.com> <20010125125417.L29115@prism.flugsvamp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday, 25 January 2001 at 12:54:17 -0600, Jonathan Lemon wrote: > On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 01:12:42PM -0500, Dennis wrote: >> At 10:58 PM 01/24/2001, Jonathan Lemon wrote: >>> In article >>> <local.mail.freebsd-hackers/5.0.0.25.0.20010124170245.03bf6140@mail.etinc.com> >>> you write: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I'll look into the Linux driver, however, and see if it has anything >>>>>> useful in it. Historically the Linux Pro/100+ driver has totally >>> sucked and >>>>>> was chalk-full of magic numbers being anded and ored. >>>>> >>>>> That's "chock full", and you're confusing the Becker driver (bad) with >>>>> the Intel-supplied driver (slightly less bad). >>>> >>>> >>>> The intel driver seems to cover all the bases and has some nice glue >>>> routines for determining the part and features available. >>>> >>>> I havent tested it under load, but I wonder if intel would consider >>>> supporting it if someone ported it over to freebsd? they have drivers for >>>> just about every other major OS except BSD. it would be nice if the driver >>>> was updated BEFORE cards and MBs that dont work started showing up on the >>>> loading dock. Every time I get a shipment we have to hold our breath until >>>> we try one out. >>> >>> The documentation is available, if you want to (or have to) sign an >>> NDA. People who have the NDA documentation are perfectly capable of >>> writing a driver, although the source can't be released. It would >>> probably be possible to release a binary driver, but why do anything >>> to help Intel, given their unhelpful attitude? >> >> If they have a published, freely distributable driver for linux. why would >> you have to sign an NDA to port it to FreeBSD? >> >> I dont think so. Not anymore anyway. Thats the whole point of this thread... > > Having looked at the Linux driver, the FreeBSD driver, and the > documentation, I can tell you that assuredly not all of the features > are documented in the Linux driver. Also, porting requires changing > things, and without an understanding of _WHY_ things are done the > way they are, you can end up invaderdently changing something that > turns out to be critical. > > Also, the Intel driver isn't put together very well, so you might end > up with a lower performance driver after all is said and done. Performance isn't even the main thing. As I said earlier, it's plain bloody unreliable. Linux people avoid the EtherExpress because they think something is wrong with the card. They were surprised when I reported that it works without any problems under FreeBSD. Do we really want to change that? Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010126141808.D1222>