| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <9929d2390806231640l7fc89221j6ff879d1e5005771@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 16:40:56 -0700 From: "Jeff Kirsher" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> To: "Taku Izumi" <izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com> Cc: "Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, "Tomohiro Kusumi" <kusumi.tomohiro@...fujitsu.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] e1000,e1000e,igb: make ioport free for adapters that need NO ioport resources On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 1:28 AM, Taku Izumi <izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com> wrote: > Dear Auke > >>> * [PATCH 1/3] e1000: make ioport free >>> * [PATCH 2/3] e1000e: make ioport free >>> * [PATCH 3/3] igb: make ioport free >> >> I think patch 2 and 3 are way too large since igb and e1000e can be >> totally ioport >> free at all times. There is no need to keep compatibility code for ioport >> in those >> drivers as it's unlikely that this will ever be needed. > > I left an old implementation in case adapters that need ioport resources > appear, > but it's true that these codes are a little redundant for igb and e1000e > drivers. > >> So, perhaps you can remove the ioport code from those 2 drivers >> (e1000e/igb) >> completely and resubmit to Jeff Kirsher? > > OK, I'll send them later. > The updated patchset looks fine. ACK. Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> -- Cheers, Jeff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists