From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [RFR] new e100 driver Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 13:01:19 -0500 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <3FD0C7EF.40305@pobox.com> References: <20031205063842.GA23843@gtf.org> <20031205164347.B1291@sygehus.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen In-Reply-To: <20031205164347.B1291@sygehus.dk> Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote: > On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 01:38:43AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>e100 3.0.9_dev just got checked into net-drivers-2.5-exp queue. As I do >>occasionally (especially for smaller drivers), I post them for review >>and comment. > > > How would I build it? A patch for the Makefile is missing. Download the net-drivers-2.5-exp patch I am about to post :) >>Patches welcome in addition to comments. >> >>One thing I am tempted to request is use of the new module_param()... > > > Does anybody have a macro that turns module_parm() into MODULE_PARM() for > 2.4 compatibility? Due to semantics of MODULE_PARM(), that's impossible AFAIK. >> * References: >> * Intel 8255x 10/100 Mbps Ethernet Controller Family, >> * Open Source Software Developers Manual, >> * http://sourceforge.net/projects/e1000 > > [cut] > >> * Hardware padding of short packets to minimum packet size is >> * enabled. 82557 pads with 7Eh, while the later controllers pad >> * with 00h. > > > I would be nice if the documentation said so. A few days ago I spent half an > hour or so trying to figure out why frames sent by an 82558 were padded with > 0x00 rather than the documented 0x7e (with no sign of skb_padto(), memset() > or anything similiar in the driver). Do you mean the PDF documentation? I dunno how much control Scott Feldman and his team have over that. Jeff