Jason Lunz wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 12:25AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
>>It still has several flaws that were pointed out, but this is the base
>>from which I would like testing and patching to proceed. (also
>>hopefully the flaws are minor in terms of general operation)
>
>
> what's the point of moving rx handling into rx_poll then running it in a
> tasklet? I've tested an older variant of that scheme from D-Link and it
> doesn't perform as well as my patch. It looks to me like an attempt to
> keep this version synced with the NAPI version of the driver, but it
> doesn't actually work very well.
This is a merge and test point. The whole interrupt handler path is
getting updated after this. (but thanks for the feedback, it is noted)
> The functional part of my patch was just taking the tx handling from
> d-link's driver and ditching the rx part. That and merging in the
> cleanups from Becker's driver; most notably ignoring the broken
> IntrRxDone bit.
Maybe you could show me that in broken-out patches :)
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 23 2002 - 22:00:25 EST