[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] support for Cobalt Networks (x86 only) systems (forrealthis

To: Bogdan Costescu <bogdan.costescu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] support for Cobalt Networks (x86 only) systems (forrealthis
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 14:43:12 -0400
Cc: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Organization: MandrakeSoft
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0106031401050.31050-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Bogdan Costescu wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, jamal wrote:
> > Still, the tx watchdogs are a good source of fault detection in the case
> > of non-availabilty of MII detection and even with the presence of MII.
> Agreed. But my question was a bit different: is there any legit situation
> where Tx timeouts can happen in a row _without_ having a link loss ? In
> this situation, we'd have false positives...


Jeff Garzik      | Echelon words of the day, from The Register:
Building 1024    | FRU Lebed HALO Spetznaz Al Amn al-Askari Glock 26 
MandrakeSoft     | Steak Knife Kill the President anarchy echelon
                 | nuclear assassinate Roswell Waco World Trade Center

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>