From: jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca>
To: Auke Kok <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com,
Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se, john.ronciak@intel.com,
greearb@candelatech.com, jgarzik@pobox.com, olel@ans.pl
Subject: Re: [e1000]: flow control on by default - good idea really?
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 09:05:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1161090331.5555.10.camel@jzny2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4533D594.2070908@intel.com>
On Mon, 2006-16-10 at 11:55 -0700, Auke Kok wrote:
> jamal wrote:
> > I think when the e1000 says via ethtool "rx is on" - it means that it
> > is _advertising_ flow control as opposed to detecting partner has flow
> > control capability.
> > Auke, can you also check this as well?
>
> Just found this in my todo box - a bit late :(
>
> yes, that appears to be the correct interpretation: we never read back the
> detected FC state from the hardware.
>
It sounds to me that ethttool needs to have this semantic fix.
IOW, ethttool doesnt differentiate the two items:
a) advertised parameters.
b) link partner negotiated parameters.
and instead #a becomes #b after negotiation.
methinks this needs fixing. Dave? Jeff?
cheers,
jamal
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-17 13:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-04 17:11 [e1000]: flow control on by default - good idea really? jamal
2006-07-04 19:20 ` jamal
2006-07-05 16:23 ` Auke Kok
2006-07-05 20:37 ` Krzysztof Oledzki
2006-07-05 18:22 ` David Miller
2006-07-05 18:32 ` Auke Kok
2006-07-05 20:45 ` Krzysztof Oledzki
2006-07-05 21:13 ` Auke Kok
2006-07-06 13:03 ` jamal
2006-07-06 18:25 ` Auke Kok
2006-07-07 3:09 ` jamal
2006-07-07 6:59 ` David Miller
2006-07-07 12:28 ` jamal
2006-07-20 20:15 ` Bug in e1000 + semantics of flow control WAS(Re: " jamal
2006-08-03 12:29 ` jamal
2006-10-16 18:55 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-17 13:05 ` jamal [this message]
2006-10-17 17:18 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-17 18:25 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-10-17 21:02 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-18 13:35 ` jamal
2006-10-18 14:57 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-17 21:46 ` David Miller
2006-07-05 16:57 ` Robert Olsson
2006-07-05 18:21 ` David Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-07-07 4:43 Michael Chan
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=1161090331.5555.10.camel@jzny2 \
--to=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se \
--cc=auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=greearb@candelatech.com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=john.ronciak@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olel@ans.pl \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).