From: Auke Kok <auke-jan.h.kok@intel•com>
To: hadi@cyberus•ca
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft•net>,
netdev@vger•kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@intel•com,
Robert.Olsson@data•slu.se, john.ronciak@intel•com,
greearb@candelatech•com, jgarzik@pobox•com, olel@ans•pl
Subject: Re: [e1000]: flow control on by default - good idea really?
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:18:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4535107E.9010609@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1161090331.5555.10.camel@jzny2>
jamal wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-16-10 at 11:55 -0700, Auke Kok wrote:
>> jamal wrote:
>
>>> I think when the e1000 says via ethtool "rx is on" - it means that it
>>> is _advertising_ flow control as opposed to detecting partner has flow
>>> control capability.
>>> Auke, can you also check this as well?
>> Just found this in my todo box - a bit late :(
>>
>> yes, that appears to be the correct interpretation: we never read back the
>> detected FC state from the hardware.
>
> It sounds to me that ethttool needs to have this semantic fix.
> IOW, ethttool doesnt differentiate the two items:
> a) advertised parameters.
> b) link partner negotiated parameters.
>
> and instead #a becomes #b after negotiation.
that's odd and confusing, we should keep them separate.
> methinks this needs fixing. Dave? Jeff?
Alternatively, we can report in the driver at link up time what FC settings were
succesfull using printk. The output of `eththool eth0` would be the best place to put
this output as well since that displays "status" and not "settings" which are displayed
with '-a|-A' options of ethtool. Lets keep `-a|-A` the same and work on showing
negotiated FC parameters in `ethtool ethX` instead.
Auke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-17 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-04 17:11 [e1000]: flow control on by default - good idea really? jamal
2006-07-04 19:20 ` jamal
2006-07-05 16:23 ` Auke Kok
2006-07-05 20:37 ` Krzysztof Oledzki
2006-07-05 18:22 ` David Miller
2006-07-05 18:32 ` Auke Kok
2006-07-05 20:45 ` Krzysztof Oledzki
2006-07-05 21:13 ` Auke Kok
2006-07-06 13:03 ` jamal
2006-07-06 18:25 ` Auke Kok
2006-07-07 3:09 ` jamal
2006-07-07 6:59 ` David Miller
2006-07-07 12:28 ` jamal
2006-07-20 20:15 ` Bug in e1000 + semantics of flow control WAS(Re: " jamal
2006-08-03 12:29 ` jamal
2006-10-16 18:55 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-17 13:05 ` jamal
2006-10-17 17:18 ` Auke Kok [this message]
2006-10-17 18:25 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-10-17 21:02 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-18 13:35 ` jamal
2006-10-18 14:57 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-17 21:46 ` David Miller
2006-07-05 16:57 ` Robert Olsson
2006-07-05 18:21 ` David Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-07-07 4:43 Michael Chan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4535107E.9010609@intel.com \
--to=auke-jan.h.kok@intel$(echo .)com \
--cc=Robert.Olsson@data$(echo .)slu.se \
--cc=davem@davemloft$(echo .)net \
--cc=greearb@candelatech$(echo .)com \
--cc=hadi@cyberus$(echo .)ca \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel$(echo .)com \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=john.ronciak@intel$(echo .)com \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=olel@ans$(echo .)pl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox