Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+2\/3\]\s+r8169\:\s+Large\s+Send\s+enablement\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+2\/3\]\s+r8169\:\s+Large\s+Send\s+enablement\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: on <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 12:03:21 -0600; This patch enables driver support of MTUs greater than 1500. Though the adapter documentation says that maximum MTU is 16k, the largest packet I could send was 7440. So, I am setting that as the max; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg00072.html (11,292 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: <Matt_Domsch@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 20:11:03 +0100; Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : Ok. Powow: - rtl8169_close() is not protected as if it was issued during dev->close. It races with the irq handler. - I see no reason why the state of the device shou; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg00074.html (13,735 bytes)
3. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: on <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:50:59 -0500; Jon Mason wrote: This patch enables driver support of MTUs greater than 1500. Though the adapter documentation says that maximum MTU is 16k, the largest packet I could send was 7440. So, I am setting; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg00078.html (8,419 bytes)
4. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 18:16:11 -0600; I disagree. It should fail, complain loudly, and let the user try and fix it (or return it to the previous state). The code provided below will act like it is successful in changing the MTU, even if; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg00132.html (9,910 bytes)
5. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: ger@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 19:45:29 +0100; Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : Mmmm... Actually both patches try to paper over the real issue: the driver should reserve the ressources it needs for the change of mtu first. Ok, I'll take the patch; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg00164.html (9,123 bytes)
6. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: aber@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 05:50:33 +0000; Agreed. I did a quick look in the other drivers, and didn't find any drivers that handle this possibility. Most of them ignore the fact. This sounds like an open hole in all of the drivers.; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg00170.html (9,250 bytes)
7. [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 12:03:21 -0600; This patch enables driver support of MTUs greater than 1500. Though the adapter documentation says that maximum MTU is 16k, the largest packet I could send was 7440. So, I am setting that as the max; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg01126.html (11,292 bytes)
8. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 20:11:03 +0100; Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : [...] Ok. Powow: - rtl8169_close() is not protected as if it was issued during dev->close. It races with the irq handler. - I see no reason why the state of the devic; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg01128.html (13,803 bytes)
9. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:50:59 -0500; this is dependent on hardware FIFO sizes...; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg01132.html (8,494 bytes)
10. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 18:16:11 -0600; I disagree. It should fail, complain loudly, and let the user try and fix it (or return it to the previous state). The code provided below will act like it is successful in changing the MTU, even if; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg01186.html (10,004 bytes)
11. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 19:45:29 +0100; Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : Mmmm... Actually both patches try to paper over the real issue: the driver should reserve the ressources it needs for the change of mtu first. Ok, I'll take the patch; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg01218.html (9,255 bytes)
12. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: Large Send enablement (score: 1): Author: Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 05:50:33 +0000; Agreed. I did a quick look in the other drivers, and didn't find any drivers that handle this possibility. Most of them ignore the fact. This sounds like an open hole in all of the drivers.; /archives/netdev/2004-11/msg01224.html (9,376 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]