Williams, Mitch A wrote:
+ { rx_broadcast, E1000_STAT(stats.bprc) },
+ { tx_broadcast, E1000_STAT(stats.bptc) },
+ { rx_multicast, E1000_STAT(stats.mprc) },
+ { tx_multicast, E1000_STAT(stats.mptc) },
{ rx_errors, E1000_STAT(net_stats.rx_errors) },
{ tx_errors,
PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 6:41 PM
To: cramerj; netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Piet Delaney; David Miller; Stephen Hemminger; Subhachandra
Chandra
Subject: Re: Patch: Asynchronous IPI and e1000 Multiple Queues (aka
ReceiveSide Scaling)
On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 18:33 -0700, Piet
Does /proc/interrupts show the interrupts incrementing for the
interface?
-Jeb
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Hajo Noerenberg
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 3:22 AM
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: e1000 not working on AMD64
applied, after replacing ethtool: with e1000: in the subject line.
Even if it's modifying the ethtool app? As long as it doesn't confuse
your scripts, I suppose.
-Jeb
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
Stupid question: Can we assume ethtool will only be used for networking
devices with a 6-byte hardware address?
If not, then the driver-specific approach would give the flexibility of
copying anything up to MAX_ADDR_LEN.
Perhaps increasing the count to MAX_ADDR_LEN is the way to go??
B'ah! Nevermind. I'll learn to read #defines one of these days.
Sorry for the spam.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of cramerj
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 6:45 PM
To: John W. Linville; Jon Wetzel
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; [EMAIL
