From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 00:41:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 00:41:23 -0500 Received: from sccimhc02.insightbb.com ([63.240.76.164]:52454 "EHLO sccimhc02.insightbb.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 00:41:22 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Steve Snyder To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: 2.4.20 eepro100 driver: Becker's or Intel's? Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 00:48:47 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Message-Id: <200212020048.47178.nobody@spamcop.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I've got an Intel 82559-based NIC (integrated into my Supermicro P4DC6+ motherboard) on which I'm running kernel v2.4.20. Which of the 2 available drivers, Becker's or Intel's, for this chipset should I run with this kernel? In prior kernel versions I've used Becker's drivers and have experienced no problems. Now Intel's driver is included in 2.4.20. I've read the included doc (e100.txt), but neither it nor the Configure documentation suggest a reason to use one driver or another. I understand that the Intel drivers have a feature that allows reduced CPU use at the expense of responsiveness, but that's all I know. Any advice on why I should prefer one driver over the other? Thanks.