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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 14:59:21 +0200 From: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org> To: Alexey Zaytsev <alexey.zaytsev@...il.com> 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 Tue, May 08, 2007 at 04:47:31PM +0400, Alexey Zaytsev 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? I'm not sure, but probably yes. > And is the allocator needed in this case? If you statically partition the available queue SRAM, no. - 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