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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 1 Mar 2009 02:57:46 -0800
From:	Jeff Kirsher <>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <>,
	David Miller <>,,,,,,
Subject: Re: 2.6.29 e100.c non-MII support status? (Re: [GIT]: Networking)

On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Andreas Mohr
<> wrote:
> Hi,
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 01:07:56PM +0100, Andreas Mohr wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 03:15:37PM -0800, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
>> > He is referring to a patch to add support for devices which do not use
>> > the MII interface which use an Intel MAC.  I have the patch in my
>> > local tree and have been keeping it up-to-date.  I should have an
>> > update on this patch after the New Year.
>> Thanks!
>> One idea worth pondering might be to provide a special struct
>> mii_if_info hookup (fully emulated mdio_read()/write())
>> for the case of the non-MII hardware types of this driver,
>> thus eliminating any added penalty in the case of nicely MII-compliant
>> hardware.
>> But this should be tackled later, now let's better move on with eepro100
>> (non-)plans...
>> Andreas Mohr
> Given that 2.6.29-rc now actually has eepro100.c removed (since -rc3 or so)
> and the current -rc6 e100.c does not contain non-MII parts, it looks like
> 2.6.29 proper will actually remove support for some PCI-based non-MII
> e100 cards.
> Thus I'd like to ask what should be done about this for real.
> Of course we could consciously decide to simply skip e100.c support for those
> non-MII cards entirely (hoping that they're not THAT wide-spread),
> but obviously I'd semi-hate this (nevermind the fact that _locally_
> I'd have to swap cards, too, which is somewhat more of a problem given an
> older network requiring to be served by "combo" cards).
> Simply spoken, it all boils down to actively deciding
> what to do in the next, about-to-be _affected_, kernel version
> about support for cards that an older, deprecated driver did support
> and the new one doesn't.
> Or one could just let things progress as-is and wait for
> yet unknown (non-)amounts of scorching user feedback to arrive
> after 2.6.29 has hit their machines ;)
> My description in the mail above was meant to list things to be done
> _after_ an initial non-MII support for e100.c has been added,
> just for clarification.
> Thanks,
> Andreas Mohr
> --

I am personally sorry that nothing has been done regarding this patch.
 I still have this patch in my local tree.  I admit that this patch
has been on the low priority list, so I will make sure the patch is
current this week and respond accordingly this week.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists