On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 15:21:14 PDT, "Karsten M. Self" writes: >on Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 05:00:45PM +0100, Keith O'Connell (keith_oconnell@b= >lueyonder.co.uk) wrote: <...> >> tulip.c:v0.91g-ppc 7/16/99 becker@cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov >> eth0: Lite-On 82c168 PNIC rev 32 at 0x1000, 00:A0:CC:D3:72:BA, IRQ >> 11. >> eth0: MII transceiver #1 config 3000 status 7829 advertising 01e1. >> PCI latency timer (CFLT) is unreasonably low at 0. Setting to 64 >> clocks. >> >> It is the "unreasonably low" coment that I would like some guidance on. >> If I put two nics in this machine and use it as a firewall only, have I >> made myself a problem? > >I doubt this is an error, more a note of state. You can probably >research this in the linux-kernel archives or the tulip sources. I´ve seen this with *every* of the 80+ dec21140- (tulip) based NICs I´ve come across so far. Don´t worry yourself, all of them (excluding one with a broken RJ45-jack) worked quite well so far. cheers, &rw -- -- "The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article, -- then hire a hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and fuck -- his dog and smash his computer into little bits. Anything more is -- just extremism." - Paul Tomblin ----
Attachment:
pgpuIiFAtMUDO.pgp
Description: PGP signature