On 07/19/2013 07:19 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/19/2013 04:22:46 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> On 07/18/2013 10:37 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> > On 07/18/2013 04:27:50 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> >> The BD is full, we will have to put the rest of padding in the next one.
>> >
>> > What rest of pad
On 07/19/2013 04:22:46 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/18/2013 10:37 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/18/2013 04:27:50 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> The BD is full, we will have to put the rest of padding in the
next one.
>
> What rest of padding? I thought you said rx_padding was 2
somehow?
On 07/18/2013 10:37 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/18/2013 04:27:50 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> On 07/17/2013 11:02 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On 07/17/2013 05:17:06 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
Can you explain a possible error scenario?
>>>
>>> 126 byte packet, no fcb. rx_padding is 4 for CRC.
On 07/18/2013 04:27:50 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/17/2013 11:02 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 05:17:06 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> On 07/16/2013 07:50 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> > On 07/16/2013 10:28:28 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> >> On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> >>
On 07/17/2013 11:02 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 05:17:06 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> On 07/16/2013 07:50 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> > On 07/16/2013 10:28:28 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> >> On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> >> > On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/17/2013 05:17:06 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/16/2013 07:50 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 10:28:28 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> > On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> >> +if (*size == etsec->rx_padding) {
>> >> +
On 07/17/2013 12:22 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 17.07.2013, at 12:17, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>
>> On 07/16/2013 07:50 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On 07/16/2013 10:28:28 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wr
On 07/17/2013 10:29 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> Am 17.07.2013 um 10:24 schrieb Fabien Chouteau :
>
>> On 07/16/2013 06:54 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On 07/16/2013 11:15:51 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/16/2013 05:37 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 05:28 PM, Fabien Choute
On 17.07.2013, at 12:17, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 07:50 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 07/16/2013 10:28:28 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>>> On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ETSEC) += etsec.o etsec_registe
On 07/16/2013 07:50 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 10:28:28 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> > On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> >> +obj-$(CONFIG_ETSEC) += etsec.o etsec_registers.o etsec_rings.o
>> >> etsec_miim.o
>> >
>> > Maybe
Am 17.07.2013 um 10:24 schrieb Fabien Chouteau :
> On 07/16/2013 06:54 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 07/16/2013 11:15:51 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>>> On 07/16/2013 05:37 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 07/16/2013 05:28 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
On 07/16/2013 06:54 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 11:15:51 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> On 07/16/2013 05:37 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> > On 07/16/2013 05:28 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> >> On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> >>> On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/16/2013 10:28:28 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> This implementation doesn't include ring priority, TCP/IP
Off-Load, QoS.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fabien Chouteau
>
> From the code comments I gather
On 07/16/2013 11:15:51 AM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/16/2013 05:37 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 05:28 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
This implementation doesn't include ring priorit
On 07/16/2013 05:37 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 05:28 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
This implementation doesn't include ring priority, TCP/IP Off-Load, QoS.
Signed-off-by: Fa
On 07/16/2013 05:28 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
This implementation doesn't include ring priority, TCP/IP Off-Load, QoS.
Signed-off-by: Fabien Chouteau
From the code comments I gather this has been tes
On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
>> This implementation doesn't include ring priority, TCP/IP Off-Load, QoS.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fabien Chouteau
>
> From the code comments I gather this has been tested on VxWorks. Has it
> been tested
On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
> This implementation doesn't include ring priority, TCP/IP Off-Load, QoS.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabien Chouteau
>From the code comments I gather this has been tested on VxWorks. Has it
been tested on Linux, or anywhere else?
> ---
> default-conf
18 matches
Mail list logo