On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 11:06:44PM +0100, Roger Luethi wrote:
> > > Perhaps the via-rhine simply can't send out packets back-to-back and
> > > needs 14 byte times of inter-packet gap. I couldn't find any stray +2
> > > in the driver anywhere but I'm just checking.
> > Or the via-rhine driver is not programming one of the registers
> > proper to get optimal spacing.
> > As with most Donald Becker drivers, many of the register layouts
> > are not documented in the sources so it's not possible to just
> > scan the driver looking for potential problems like this.
> > For example, maybe the TxConfig register has an "IPG" field but
> > we'll never know by reading anything in the driver source.
> Presumably Donald Becker had only access to the publicly available
> documentation at the time which is very incomplete and buggy. What
> little time my day job leaves for hacking via-rhine is consumed by the
> WOL issues that have come up with 2.6.9+, but if you have a specific
> question that can be answered by someone who knows the chip but not
> necessarily Linux I can try and poke my contacts.
"Is the hardware capable of sending back-to-back packets (i.e. with
an inter-packet gap of no more than 96 bit times)?"
"Can misprogramming the chip lead to the effect that the inter-packet
gap is never less than 112 bit times?"
Thanks in advance.
> Of course, you can always check if VIA's driver has the same issue. If
> it doesn't, chances are we can borrow the fix.
Hmm, didn't know they had such a driver. Where can I find it?