Re: [PATCH 1/7] netpoll: shorten carrier detect timeout

[Matt Mackall <mpm@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 05:35:05AM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Matt Mackall wrote:
> >Ok, on closer inspection, the current logic is: the NIC reports
> >carrier detect nearly instaneously and thus its carrier detect
> >reporting is considered unreliable. Rather than immediately sending
> >packets, we wait for some interval for it to really be up so that the
> >backlog of console messages doesn't get pumped into the bit bucket.
> >
> >So I'm going to change it from "flaky" to "untrustworthy" and add a
> >comment.
> 
> Why don't you trust an instaneously available carrier? Any
> reason to assume there will be false positives?

Because I had reports of people losing all their boot messages until
this logic was added (about a year ago now?). I don't remember which
NICs were implicated, but some apparently report carrier is always
available.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.