On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 02:07:33PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > 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. >
Right. marius's patch already included that. > > > 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? > The patch used ethernet-specific options. > -- > 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"