- User Since
- May 26 2014, 3:41 PM (173 w, 4 d)
Did microsoft update the referenced link? I don't see the removal notice in it.
Is there a reason that we don't modify prefetch() instead of creating a new prefetch2() function?
Since there's no real way to test this on FreeBSD at the moment ...
Wed, Sep 13
Tue, Sep 12
Since this driver explicitly refuses to compile on non-64bit architectures (where LP64 is not defined), I'm moving this to files.amd64 as I suspect that this was what was intended. Else this breaks every FreeBSD build.
Sat, Sep 9
Fri, Sep 8
Wed, Sep 6
This is a mass replacement of the header file defines. Its a lot of churn.
Sat, Sep 2
Wed, Aug 30
I *think* sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.c needs to be modified with shortcuts for this with something like:
Tue, Aug 29
Fri, Aug 25
So far, so good. A couple of "nits" that I'd like you to consider first.
Yeah, legacy em(4) device on em2:
Huh .... Testing this review by itself this morning. I see the following startup panic:
Wed, Aug 23
Aug 10 2017
Aug 9 2017
Aug 8 2017
Aug 7 2017
@erj are you going to commit this once you've made the IXL updates required for it to function?
IFLIB provides an ifdi_update_admin_status() function that is called periodically do that you don't have to manage the callout yourself. sys/dev/e1000/if_em.c does this as an example. Can this be changed to match the IFLIB implementation?
Aug 3 2017
Aug 2 2017
Aug 1 2017
I've tested 82599ES in single and LAGG configurations. This all seems good to me.
Jul 31 2017
Can you update the review today to address Matt's changes in head that removed the extraneous config variable?
Jul 28 2017
Ok, cool. If there's nothing to be done with this review, then "abandon" it so it closes out and goes away.
Jul 27 2017
I will add this to the commit queue for today.
Jul 26 2017
Jul 25 2017
These seem odd. Did they get disconnected from the driver?
*sigh* patch on FreeBSD sure doesn't like this review. I'm trying to find the "do what I tell you to do" command line switch to get this to apply.
Can this be regenerated after svn R321481? It seems like there was some cross-over between these two reviews and the diff isn't valid now.
This was reverted at svn R321480. I'm reopening for further discussion.
I've reverted this from -current at svn R308180. Please discuss here.
Jul 24 2017
Can this be regenerated from the base of the tree instead of sys/dev/bnxt ?
Can this review be regenerated from the base of the tree instead of inside sys/dev/bnxt ?