[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4665A0B6.6020902@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 10:43:18 -0700
From: "Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
CC: Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
David Acker <dacker@...net.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
John Ronciak <john.ronciak@...el.com>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...ox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix e100 rx path on ARM (was [PATCH] e100 rx: or s and
el bits)
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:27:19AM -0700, Kok, Auke wrote:
>> We need to make sure that now that we're getting closer to 2.6.22 we don't
>> end up killing e100 in it. Should we drop the current fixes in it to be on
>> the safe side and aim for 2.6.23? I would hate to see an untested codepath
>> breaking e100 on something like ppc or mips... that will be very painful
>
> I certainly agree with this assessment...
>
> I've been wondering if, based on all this recent work, we should revert
> the s-bit stuff and wait for 2.6.23.
Yes, that's my point. If Milton and David agree I think we should do so immediately.
If so, do you want me to write a revert-patch or do you have some magic to do
that for me?
Auke
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists