From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: John Ronciak <john.ronciak@gmail.com>
Cc: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>,
kus Kusche Klaus <kus@keba.com>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, john.ronciak@intel.com,
ganesh.venkatesan@intel.com, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: My vote against eepro* removal
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:30:48 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1137807048.3241.58.camel@mindpipe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56a8daef0601201719t448a6177lfebabe3ca38a00c7@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 17:19 -0800, John Ronciak wrote:
> On 1/20/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> > Seems like the important question is, why does e100 need a watchdog if
> > eepro100 works fine without one? Isn't the point of a watchdog in this
> > context to work around other bugs in the driver (or the hardware)?
> There are a number of things that the watchdog in e100 does. It
> checks link (up, down), reads the hardware stats, adjusts the adaptive
> IFS and checks to 3 known hang conditions based on certain types of
> the hardware. You might be able to get around without doing the
> work-arounds (as long as you don't' see hangs happening with the
> hardware being used) but the checking of the link and the stats are
> probably needed.
Why don't these cause excessive scheduling delays in eepro100 then?
Can't we just copy the eepro100 behavior?
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-21 1:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-20 9:37 My vote against eepro* removal kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-20 9:55 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-01-21 0:40 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-21 1:19 ` John Ronciak
2006-01-21 1:30 ` Lee Revell [this message]
2006-01-21 2:01 ` John Ronciak
2006-01-21 3:56 ` Lee Revell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-01-24 7:38 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-23 11:01 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-23 20:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2006-01-20 11:27 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-20 10:51 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-20 11:05 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-01-20 10:19 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-20 11:02 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-01-21 0:45 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-19 10:26 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-19 16:20 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-01-19 17:16 ` John Ronciak
2006-01-19 19:09 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-01-19 22:57 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-01-19 10:08 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-19 7:19 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-19 7:24 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-19 7:42 ` Arjan van de Ven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1137807048.3241.58.camel@mindpipe \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=ganesh.venkatesan@intel.com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=john.ronciak@gmail.com \
--cc=john.ronciak@intel.com \
--cc=johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru \
--cc=kus@keba.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.