Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*zerocopy\s+changes\s+in\s+3c59x\.c\s*$/: 24 ]

Total 24 documents matching your query.

1. zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 20:46:48 +1100
n
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00290.html (7,975 bytes)

2. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: on <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 03:33:49 -0800 (PST)
e
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00291.html (8,779 bytes)

3. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: ler" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 22:49:27 +1100
x
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00292.html (9,071 bytes)

4. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: on <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 05:04:37 -0800 (PST)
?
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00293.html (9,329 bytes)

5. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: ler" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 00:27:32 +1100
e
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00294.html (9,965 bytes)

6. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: on <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 05:26:18 -0800 (PST)
e
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00295.html (9,415 bytes)

7. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: ler" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 00:52:16 +1100
t
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00296.html (10,380 bytes)

8. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: on <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 05:48:45 -0800 (PST)
s
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00297.html (9,835 bytes)

9. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: ler" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 20:46:03 +0300 (MSK)
i
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00300.html (8,847 bytes)

10. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: x>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 20:50:56 +0300 (MSK)
e
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00301.html (8,038 bytes)

11. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: xx
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 19:04:45 +0100 (CET)
y
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00302.html (9,252 bytes)

12. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:57:07 -0800 (PST)
i
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00337.html (8,591 bytes)

13. zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 20:46:48 +1100
Hi, Alexey. /* Tx timeout interval (millisecs) */ -static int watchdog = 400; +static int watchdog = 5000; Five second transmit timeout. Why is this? And why do we do this: vp->stats.rx_compressed++;
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00679.html (7,975 bytes)

14. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 03:33:49 -0800 (PST)
Every zerocopy driver does this, rx_compressed counts HW csummed transmit packets, and tx_compressed counts transmit packets containing more than one buffer. Later, David S. Miller davem@xxxxxxxxxx
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00680.html (8,829 bytes)

15. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 22:49:27 +1100
Thanks. I can see that :) But why do this, rather than create new accounting fields? Let me guess: short-term thing, intended to be removed, didn't want to hack the userspace tools?
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00681.html (9,153 bytes)

16. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 05:04:37 -0800 (PST)
Why add new fields when they are unnecessary? What is hurt by having these fields increment. We can teach programs like ifconfig et al. that for ethernet type interfaces, these fields have this diffe
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00682.html (9,436 bytes)

17. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 00:27:32 +1100
Hey, I was just asking! Dunno about others, but for me the zc thing has basically come from nowhere - I'm still coming up to speed about the design decisions which were made, how it is implemented, e
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00683.html (10,105 bytes)

18. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 05:26:18 -0800 (PST)
Right, the headers are all in the skb->data buffer and the application data sits in the SKB frags. If we allowed SG without hw csumming, for example :-) It would let us identify such devices by just
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00684.html (9,580 bytes)

19. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 00:52:16 +1100
I see. And just to clarify: it is currently the case that we do support scatter/gather on devices which don't have hardware checksums on transmit. Inter-| Receive | Transmit face |bytes packets errs
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00685.html (10,578 bytes)

20. Re: zerocopy changes in 3c59x.c (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 05:48:45 -0800 (PST)
Yes, but I won't allow this for ipv4/ipv6 in the final zerocopy patch I send to Linus. The reason (did you attend my talk at UNSW last week??? :-))) is that if SG-only is allowed it is possible for t
/archives/netdev/2001-01/msg00686.html (10,056 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu