[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46403AF3.9000300@wpkg.org>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 10:55:15 +0200
From: Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...g.org>
To: Alexey Zaytsev <alexey.zaytsev@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Michael Jones <mlj28@....ac.uk>,
Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Intel IXP4xx network drivers v.2 - Ethernet and HSS
Alexey Zaytsev schrieb:
> On 5/8/07, Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...g.org> wrote:
>> Michael Jones wrote:
>>
>> >> +#ifndef __ARMEB__
>> >> +#warning Little endian mode not supported
>> >> +#endif
>> >
>> > Personally I'm less fussed about WAN / LE support. Anyone with any
>> > sense will run ixp4xx boards doing such a specialised network
>> > operation as BE. Also, NSLU2-Linux can't test this functionality with
>> > our LE setup as we don't have this hardware on-board. You may just
>> > want to declare a depends on ARMEB in Kconfig (with or without OR
>> > (ARM || BROKEN) ) and have done with it - it's up to you.
>>
>> Christian Hohnstaedt's work did support LE though.
>>
>> Not all ixp4xx boards are by definition "doing such a specialised
>> network operation".
>>
>
> I was always curious, why do people want to run ixp4xx in LE mode? What
> are the benefits that overweight the obvious performance degradation?
I guess the main reason, at least for me, is that there is only one
distro that properly supports LE ARM: Debian.
It greatly simplifies management/administration of a higher number of
devices, given the fact that Debian also supports other architectures
(not just x86/64, sometimes PPC, like most distros do).
Not always network performance is to most important factor.
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists