On Tuesday 18 May 2010 1:30:32 pm Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 01:15:37PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > I think it would be useful if we could pick a device-independent interface > > for > > configuring flow control on network interfaces, perhaps as media options > > via > > ifconfig. I know that the msk(4) driver allows RX and TX flow control to > > be > > toggled via the link0 and link1 flags (the manpage for msk(4) needs > > updating > > on this topic I think). I have a hack for work to disable TX flow control > > on > > The hack used in e1000phy(4), brgphy(4) and ip1000phy(4) should be > removed.
So this looks to actually be different (I was confused). Apparently the link[012] flags are separate from the flag[012] shared flags for ifmedia. It does look like the link0 use in these drivers could be replaced by proper use of IFM_ETH_MASTER media option flag instead. It seems that IFM_ETH_MASTER is missing from IFM_SUBTYPE_ETHERNET_OPTION_DESCRIPTIONS in ifmedia.h which would need to be fixed before ifconfig could get/set it. Once that change is in place I think these drivers could check that flag instead of the IFF_LINK0 to determine if they are the master. > > cxgb(4), but it doesn't use flow control currently. Is flow control > > ethernet- > > specific? If so, perhaps we could add two new flags for RX and TX flow > > control to the Ethernet-specific options in that case? Do folks have other > > ideas? > > > > AFAIK marius@ is working on it and may have latest patches. Ok. Does his patch use Ethernet-specific options or some other approach? -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
