(I'm CC-ing the other developer)
Il Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 03:44:43AM +, Vasco Visser ha scritto:
> Hi,
>
> I've tested the new driver for a couple of days, mostly by running
> XDMCP session over the Gbit LAN. Its all working good.
>
> I didn't experience any crashes or slowdowns at all. The
(I'm CC-ing the other developer)
Il Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 03:44:43AM +, Vasco Visser ha scritto:
Hi,
I've tested the new driver for a couple of days, mostly by running
XDMCP session over the Gbit LAN. Its all working good.
I didn't experience any crashes or slowdowns at all. The
Hi,
I've tested the new driver for a couple of days, mostly by running
XDMCP session over the Gbit LAN. Its all working good.
I didn't experience any crashes or slowdowns at all. The driver is
definitly usefull in it current state.
Performance is good, tops at ~40MB/s.
BTW: what is this MSI
Hi,
I've tested the new driver for a couple of days, mostly by running
XDMCP session over the Gbit LAN. Its all working good.
I didn't experience any crashes or slowdowns at all. The driver is
definitly usefull in it current state.
Performance is good, tops at ~40MB/s.
BTW: what is this MSI
I've got the p5B-E board to with the onboard attansic l1.
I did the the atl1-2.0.2 patch against the 2.6.19.rc6 kernel.
I can confirm the card is working but performance is *really* bad, 200Kb/s
over Gbit LAN.
I tried copying a ~50MB file over SSH and it didn't complete because of a
connection
I've got the p5B-E board to with the onboard attansic l1.
I did the the atl1-2.0.2 patch against the 2.6.19.rc6 kernel.
I can confirm the card is working but performance is *really* bad, 200Kb/s
over Gbit LAN.
I tried copying a ~50MB file over SSH and it didn't complete because of a
connection
I've got the p5B-E board to with the onboard attansic l1.
I did the the atl1-2.0.2 patch against the 2.6.19.rc6 kernel.
I can confirm the card is working but performance is *really* bad, 200Kb/s
over Gbit LAN.
I tried copying a ~50MB file over SSH and it didn't complete because of a
connection
I've got the p5B-E board to with the onboard attansic l1.
I did the the atl1-2.0.2 patch against the 2.6.19.rc6 kernel.
I can confirm the card is working but performance is *really* bad, 200Kb/s
over Gbit LAN.
I tried copying a ~50MB file over SSH and it didn't complete because of a
connection
Jay Cliburn wrote:
I've been working on this with Jay since his initial submission.
Thanks to everyone who has provided feedback on the resubmit. We're
currently quite short on actual testers, since the chip only seems to
be on Asus M2V motherboards at present. Please let me and Jay know if
Jay Cliburn wrote:
I've been working on this with Jay since his initial submission.
Thanks to everyone who has provided feedback on the resubmit. We're
currently quite short on actual testers, since the chip only seems to
be on Asus M2V motherboards at present. Please let me and Jay know if
Luca Tettamanti wrote:
Got the board, done some basic testing: so far so good :)
The controller also supports MSI and (at least with my chipset - G965)
it works fine:
218: 80649 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth1
which is nice, otherwise it ends up sharing the IRQ with SATA and USB.
I
Hello,
Luca Tettamanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> Chris Snook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
>>
>> I've been working on this with Jay since his initial submission. Thanks
>> to everyone who has provided feedback on the resubmit. We're currently
>> quite short on actual testers, since
Hello,
Luca Tettamanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto:
Chris Snook [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto:
I've been working on this with Jay since his initial submission. Thanks
to everyone who has provided feedback on the resubmit. We're currently
quite short on actual testers, since the chip
Luca Tettamanti wrote:
Got the board, done some basic testing: so far so good :)
The controller also supports MSI and (at least with my chipset - G965)
it works fine:
218: 80649 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth1
which is nice, otherwise it ends up sharing the IRQ with SATA and USB.
I
Would be nice if it used atl_ not at_ so its less likely to cause
namespace clashes.
You have various macros for swaps that are pretty ugly - we have
cpu_to and le/be_to_cpu functions for most swapping cases and these are
generally optimised assembler (eg bswap on x86)
AT_DESC_USED/UNUSED would
Based upon feedback from Stephen Hemminger and Francois Romieu, please
consider this resubmitted patchset that provides support for the Attansic
L1 gigabit ethernet adapter. This patchset is built against 2.6.19-rc6.
The original patchset was submitted 20060927.
The monolithic version of this
Based upon feedback from Stephen Hemminger and Francois Romieu, please
consider this resubmitted patchset that provides support for the Attansic
L1 gigabit ethernet adapter. This patchset is built against 2.6.19-rc6.
The original patchset was submitted 20060927.
The monolithic version of this
Would be nice if it used atl_ not at_ so its less likely to cause
namespace clashes.
You have various macros for swaps that are pretty ugly - we have
cpu_to and le/be_to_cpu functions for most swapping cases and these are
generally optimised assembler (eg bswap on x86)
AT_DESC_USED/UNUSED would
18 matches
Mail list logo
