Sorry for wasting everyones bandwidth and time .. thanks to Dominic Marks I have re-read my own question and actually *read* the altq(9) manpage in addition to the altq(4) manpage... I make the conclusion that if the IFQ_* macros are used in the driver source, the driver is ALTQified.
I also draw the conclusion that vr(4) supports ALTQ and will test this later this weekend. I guess that the release notes are a little wrong too. BR, Olof >>>>> "Olof" == Olof Samuelsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Olof> Hello, I've noticed a discrepancy between the ALTQ manpage and Olof> the release notes (both in 5.3): Olof> altq(4) says: SUPPORTED DEVICES Olof> The driver modifications described in altq(9) and required Olof> to use a certain network card with ALTQ have been applied Olof> to the following hardware drivers an(4), ath(4), awi(4), Olof> bfe(4), dc(4), em(4), fxp(4), hme(4), lnc(4), wi(4), Olof> de(4), rl(4), sis(4), vr(4) ----------------------------------------------------------------> !!!!! Olof> and xl(4). Olof> Whereas http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.3R/relnotes-i386.html Olof> says: Olof> The ALTQ framework has been imported from a KAME snapshot as of Olof> 7 June Olof> 2004. This import breaks ABI compatibility of struct ifnet and Olof> requires all network drives to be recompiled. Additionally, Olof> some of the networking drivers have been modified to Olof> support the ALTQ framework. Updated drivers are bfe(4), Olof> em(4), fxp(4), em(4), lnc(4), tun(4), de(4), rl(4), sis(4), Olof> and xl(4). Olof> Which list is correct? What should I look for in the driver Olof> source? Olof> Btw, em(4) is mentioned twice in the release notes ... hme(4)? Olof> BR, Olof Olof> -- Olof> | Olof Samuelsson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | olof s12345678n - private Olof> mail | _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
