From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6017 invoked by alias); 29 Oct 2003 18:24:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 6010 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2003 18:24:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail0.rawbw.com) (198.144.192.41) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 Oct 2003 18:24:04 -0000 Received: from rawbw.com (m206-98.dsl.tsoft.com [198.144.206.98]) by mail0.rawbw.com (8.11.6p2/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9TIO3a85501 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 10:24:03 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3FA005C0.7070804@rawbw.com> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 18:24:00 -0000 From: John Newlin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [ECOS] Ethernet driver question X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00497.txt.bz2 Couple of silly questions, I like multiple choice: 1) When the HDWR_Send function is called, is there: a) a valid FCS already at the end of the data? b) 4 bytes where the FCS should be, but expects the hardware to change it on the way out c) No FCS, expects the hardware to append an FCS (Our hardware can generate an FCS, so would save some cycles if the FCS were not generated in software) 2) When HDWR_recv is called to get a packet, does it expect a valid enet frame including MAC address, and FCS on the end, or does it want those stripped off? I imagine the former is correct, but I just want to make sure. Thanks, -John Newlin -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss