From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen Subject: Re: [PATCH] e100: Enable receiving bogus packets, and transmitting bad/custom CRC Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 15:56:12 +0100 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20031125155612.C1107@sygehus.dk> References: <3FC2931B.3070903@candelatech.com> <20031124152933.1420f6cf.davem@redhat.com> <3FC298C9.8080302@candelatech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: To: netdev@oss.sgi.com Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3FC298C9.8080302@candelatech.com>; from greearb@candelatech.com on Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 03:48:25PM -0800 Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 03:48:25PM -0800, Ben Greear wrote: > > So, RX-ALL can be one flag, another for RX-FCS, and the TX-CUSTOM-FCS > can be a separate patch altogether? Yes. For example, the i82586 can support RX-ALL but not RX-FCS, and TX-CUSTOM-FCS would be more work than with i82596 and i82557/8/9. Since the i82586 has a global (as opposed to per TX cmd) TX-CUSTOM-FCS flag, it would be necessary to send a configure command whenever this flag changes from one TX skb to another. So yes, please separate these features. -- Regards, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen