[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9BBC4E0CF881AA4299206E2E1412B62630D64753@ORSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 19:13:36 +0000
From: "Wyborny, Carolyn" <carolyn.wyborny@...el.com>
To: Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
"Pieper, Jeffrey E" <jeffrey.e.pieper@...el.com>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>,
"Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@...el.com>,
"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
"Allan, Bruce W" <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>,
"Skidmore, Donald C" <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>,
"Rose, Gregory V" <gregory.v.rose@...el.com>,
"Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
"Duyck, Alexander H" <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] igb: correct hardware type (i210/i211) check in
igb_loopback_test()
-----Original Message-----
From: Jesper Juhl [mailto:jj@...osbits.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 12:06 PM
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net; Wyborny, Carolyn; Pieper, Jeffrey E; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; Rick Jones; Ronciak, John; Brandeburg, Jesse; Allan, Bruce W; Skidmore, Donald C; Rose, Gregory V; Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P; Duyck, Alexander H; David S. Miller
Subject: [PATCH] igb: correct hardware type (i210/i211) check in igb_loopback_test()
In the original code
...
if ((adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i210)
|| (adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i210)) { ...
the second check of 'adapter->hw.mac.type' is pointless since it tests for the exact same value as the first.
After reading through a few other parts of the driver I believe that the second check was actually intended to check for 'e1000_i211'
rather than 'e1000_i210', but I admit that I'm not certain so someone with more knowledge about this driver should ACK the patch before it gets merged.
Unfortunately I have no hardware to actually test this on, so it is compile tested only.
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c
index a19c84c..ad489b7 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c
@@ -1783,7 +1783,7 @@ static int igb_loopback_test(struct igb_adapter *adapter, u64 *data)
goto out;
}
if ((adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i210)
- || (adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i210)) {
+ || (adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i211)) {
dev_err(&adapter->pdev->dev,
"Loopback test not supported "
"on this part at this time.\n");
--
1.7.11.3
--
Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net> http://www.chaosbits.net/
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please.
ACK.
Good catch. Thanks Jesper!
Carolyn
Carolyn Wyborny
Linux Development
LAN Access Division
Intel Corporation
--
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