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]"
