Hello Andy, > The answer there is simple: stupidity! The word is too hard, just say forgetting :-)
Thanks again Laurent > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Andy Fleming [mailto:afleming at freescale.com] > Envoye : jeu. 23 fevrier 2006 21:08 > A : Laurent Lagrange > Cc : linuxppc-embedded at ozlabs.org; vbordug at ru.mvista.com; > pantelis.antoniou at gmail.com > Objet : Re: Gianfar is slower than fcc_enet on MPC8541 ??? > > > > On Feb 23, 2006, at 11:28, Laurent Lagrange wrote: > > > Hi everybody, > > > > I tried the below Andy's idea. It works fine. > > It is my TCP clients which now slow the traffic. > > > > But I don't know why the default timeouts are so high. > > If the traffic is high, the timeout does not fire. > > If the traffic is low, the timeout seems too long (???). > > The answer there is simple: stupidity! :) I just didn't carefully > test the values for performance when I chose them. I probably also > did the math wrong, because I was more concerned about seeing if it > worked at all. It's also possible it got set that way to see a > measurable difference to prove it was working, and then got left as > the default. Rest assured, there was not a deliberate reason. We > submitted a patch once this performance issue was discovered. > > > > >
