Subject: Re: ex0 weird error
To: Andrew Brown <>
From: Peter Seebach <>
List: current-users
Date: 12/14/2000 13:54:55
In message <>, Andrew Brown writes:
>yep.  looking back, i can see that you asked about this before.  5 Sep
>1999 to be exact.  funny...but that message (and the actual patch) are
>not in the mailing list archives on

I *am* getting old.

>>Okay, now that it's known, I'll just ignore it.  Whatever the fix was,
>>though, it did work for me, so maybe it should get pulled into the tree -
>>unless it's ugly, in which case, maybe it's time to analyze what's wrong
>>with it.  :)

>i don't think it did.  the first of the two line changes seems to have
>gone in in a slightly altered form.  the second one-liner doesn't look
>like it went in.  here it is again.

I'll apply this, and I bet it'll work.

While I'm at it:

I'm doing NFS testing.  With ex0, I was getting about 7MB/sec writes to
the NFS server.  With an fxp0, I was getting no more than 5.  Anyone know
of a reason why an fxp0 should be slower than an ex0, detectably, on a 500Mhz