netdev - Re: E100 RX ring buffers continued...

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]

Message-ID: <m34orzj23w.fsf@intrepid.localdomain>
Date:	Sat, 22 Aug 2009 17:32:35 +0200
From:	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
To:	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	Bruce Allan <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>,
	PJ Waskiewicz <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
	John Ronciak <john.ronciak@...el.com>
Subject: Re: E100 RX ring buffers continued...

Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl> writes:

> There is also apparently unsupported and mostly undocumented "flexible
> mode". The question to Intel's experts: can the flexible mode be used
> anyway? I can write the code, but need info about eg. the data
> structures (RFD, how does it work in flexible mode) and a confirmation
> the silicon (or maybe which silicon) will work with it.

I can see there is some "erratum" in 82559 related to flexible RX mode.
It seems we're not affected, though - it requires more than 1 RBD (per
RFD I hope) for the problem to happen.

Do I get it right?
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa
--
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