On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:00 PM, Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > Thanks for testing. The main focus for msk(4) was for getting working > native driver. Performance was not heavily tested and highly likely > to be lower than that of optimal performance. It seems that myk(4) has > several workarounds for better performance but that magic code is hard > to verify wihtout errata information from vendor. :-( > > Btw, I'll commit msk(4) in two days if there is no breakage report > for e1000phy(4). I have been using the msk driver without any problems on an Intel SE7520BD2 server board. We have a few of these at work, and it's nice to see that we will finally be able to use this second NIC on these boards! At this point, are there plans to MFC the e1000phy changes and the msk driver? Thanks for all your hard work! Andy /* Andre Guibert de Bruet * 6f43 6564 7020 656f 2e74 4220 7469 6a20 */ /* Code poet / Sysadmin * 636f 656b 2e79 5320 7379 6461 696d 2e6e */ /* GSM: +1 734 846 8758 * 5520 494e 2058 6c73 7565 6874 002e 0000 */ /* WWW: siliconlandmark.com * C/C++, Java, Perl, PHP, SQL, XHTML, XML */Received on Tue Dec 12 2006 - 02:55:34 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:03 UTC