![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Hi Scott, On Monday 22 December 2003 06:26, Feldman, Scott wrote: > > I would also be interested in a statement from intel fellows on > > the reasoning behind this decision, since every user of gkrellm > > /* Reset the timer */ > > - mod_timer(&adapter->watchdog_timer, jiffies + 2 * HZ); > > + mod_timer(&adapter->watchdog_timer, jiffies + HZ); > > } > > That should be OK if you're not linked at half duplex or using a > 82541/7 Ethernet controller. e1000_smartspeed() and > e1000_adaptive_ifs() are sensitive to the watchdog interval, so > we'll need to make sure those are OK before adjusting the timer > from 2 to 1 seconds. This issue is tracker here: > http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1192. Thanks for clarification and the pointers. Nice to know, that this issue is still under investigation. Let me add, that your and your companies strong continuous linux commitment/support has influenced and will influence our future hardware decisions. And NICs are a crucial part of our diskless setups.. > -scott Thanks again and merry christmas, Pete <dream OT> If only some manufacturer would pick up the _existing_ pieces, and create a barebone like fanless Pentium M based system with a CSA attached 8254x NIC. Add SSD for swap/suspend, or get nbd to work for those, and be done with a low current consumption/low heat/zero dB system, which easily outperforms current local harddisk setups. BTW: I do remember 0 dB computing back in the 80ies on my 8MHz, 4 MB Atari ST. Oh, well.. </dream OT> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:59 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||