Subject: RE: A new wm driver
To: None <>
From: Pascal Renauld <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 12/17/2003 14:40:34
In fact, the line breakdown is as following:
wc -l if_wm*.{c,h}
    3238 if_wm.c
    5051 if_wm_hw.c
    2099 if_wm_hw.h
     134 if_wm_osdep.h
     433 if_wmreg.h
   10955 total

if_wm_hw.c and if_wm_hw.h are dedicated to tuning and represent around =
7100 lines. I think it speaks for itself. The *generic* part of the =
driver is around 3700 lines.

Again, the source code is available from FTP with anonymous access at = If some people find it useful, please send feedbacks, =
otherwise just ignore it.


-----Original Message-----
From:	Thor Lancelot Simon []
Sent:	Wed 12/17/2003 2:08 PM
To:	Pascal Renauld
Subject:	Re: A new wm driver
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 01:31:59PM -0500, Pascal Renauld wrote:
> Well, it's just that we had some issues with specific hardware and =
> that the hardware was much better supported in the em driver. The =
> NetBSD driver is 3500 lines against 11400 for the one coming from =

3X the total line count, in a device driver, sounds to me like a pretty
persuasive argument *against* using the larger driver.  ;-)

> The lower layer part of the driver (5000 lines) is dedicated to tuning =
> the different boards.

I'm sure there's some work to be done here, because I've already noticed
significant performance differences between, for instance, the PCI-X =
the standard PCI adapters in the same machine, seemingly to do with =
default tuning for different PCI bus configurations.  But I can't =
that that could possibly justify a vastly more complex and enormously
larger driver that doesn't actually provide any features the current
driver doesn't also provide...