Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, Mike Smith had
to walk into mine and say:
> > > why not use the async method?
> >
> > Because this is not an asynchronous task that I'm trying to do here.
> > I'm talking about reading and writing registers from the ethernet
> > controller. If this was a PCI device, I'd be using
> > bus_space_read_X()/bus_space_write_X() to read the registers directly. I
> > don't want to start reading a register and then come back a while later
> > to read the results. The code isn't meant to work like that.
>
> Unfortunately, given that your 'register read request' is being queued
> over what is basically a packet-switched network, you're going to have to
> change the way the code works so that it _can_ work like that. If you
> don't like it now, imagine how much less you're going to like, say, I2O
> or SystemIO...
I need to be able to read/write registers in the MAC at interrupt context.
I'm not trying to be stubborn: there's just no other way to do the things
I need to do. If I get a transmit timeout and I need to flip the 'reset MAC'
bit in one of the control registers, how am I supposed to do it? When a
timeout fires and I have to check the PHY's link state or read the MAC
stats counter registers, how am I supposed to do it?
The hack that I made to usbdi.c seems to have fixed that problem for now,
however I'm still not sure why I can't seem to transfer full 1500 byte
frames without getting an I/O error.
-Bill
--
=============================================================================
-Bill Paul (212) 854-6020 | System Manager, Master of Unix-Fu
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Center for Telecommunications Research
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Columbia University, New York City
=============================================================================
"It is not I who am crazy; it is I who am mad!" - Ren Hoek, "Space Madness"
=============================================================================
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
