linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Intel IXP4xx network drivers v.3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 8 May 2007 16:47:31 +0400
From:	"Alexey Zaytsev" <alexey.zaytsev@...il.com>
To:	"Lennert Buytenhek" <buytenh@...tstofly.org>
Cc:	"Krzysztof Halasa" <khc@...waw.pl>,
	"Michael-Luke Jones" <mlj28@....ac.uk>,
	"Jeff Garzik" <jeff@...zik.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Russell King" <rmk@....linux.org.uk>,
	"ARM Linux Mailing List" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Intel IXP4xx network drivers v.3 - QMGR

On 5/8/07, Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org> wrote:
...
> As with Christian's driver, I don't know whether an SRAM allocator
> makes much sense.  We can just set up a static allocation map for the
> in-tree drivers and leave out the allocator altogether.  I.e. I don't
> think it's worth the complexity (and just because the butt-ugly Intel
> code has an allocator isn't a very good reason. :-)

Is the qmgr used when the NPEs are utilized as DMA engines? And is the
allocator needed in this case? If yes, I beg you not to drop it,
because we use one NPE for this purpose, and if we are going to adopt
this driver instead of the intel's one, you will receive a patch
adding DMA functionality very soon. ;)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/