Re: [ANN] removal of certain net drivers coming soon: eepro100, xircom_tulip_cb, iph5526

[Scott Feldman <sfeldma@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 16:48, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 00:14:30 +0000
> Russell King <rmk+lkml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > The fact of the matter is that eepro100.c works on ARM, e100.c doesn't.
> > There's a message from me back on 30th June 2004 at about 10:30 BST on
> > this very list which generated almost no interest from anyone...
> 
> I see.  Since eepro100 just uses a fixed set of RX buffers in the
> ring (ie. the DMA links are never changed) it works.

eepro100 does a copy if pkt_len < rx_copybreak, otherwise it send up the
skb and allocates and links a new one in it's place (see
speedo_rx_link).

So I would say e100 and eepro100 are the same for >= rx_copybreak.  Why
does one work and not the other?  Is it because the RFD is aligned in
eepro100?

Russell, what happens with modprobe eepro100 rx_copybreak=0?

-scott