[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [UPDATE] Zerocopy patches, against 2.4.1-pre10
"David S. Miller" wrote:
> I'm back from OZ, and to help deal with my sudden lack of Victoria
> Bitter,

aww.. Poor Dave. I'll have an extra one for you.

> ...
> There is one critical failure I saw reported with zerocopy, where all
> transmits basically failed using a 3c59x card. This indicates that
> our driver checks thought the 3c59x you had supported TX checksumming
> in hardware, when in fact it does not.

I've tested the latest zc patch on:

3c905 (10b7/9050)
3c905B (10b7/9055)
3c905C (10b7/9200)
3c590 (10b7/5900)

no problems. I simply mounted an NFS server with rsize=wsize=8192
and read a few files - I assume this is sufficient?

I can test a 3c575 later today.

What I suggest we do here is to add a new flag to the per-device
table `HAS_HWCKSM' and use that to set the device capabilities,
rather than using the IS_CYCLONE stuff. Then we can add cards
individually as confirmation comes in.

I do have a 200-line 3c59x patch banked up - it does the following:

- fixes some interface selection problems with 3c590/3c900's
- fixes a PAGE_SIZE memory leak which occurs each time the
driver is unloaded (pci_free_consistent needed).
- fixes the 3c556B's PM-resume behaviour

So... How to coordinate these diffs? I'd propose that I implement
the HAS_HWCKSM thing, test zerocopy with it on the five NICs which
I have. Then what? Ask Linus to merge the non-zc parts?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.035 / U:5.444 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site