[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9dfc9239-4146-3b4e-a2b1-f82cdff2b78e@synopsys.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 17:19:00 +0000
From: Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>
CC: <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>, <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
<peppe.cavallaro@...com>, <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
<f.fainelli@...il.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v2,net-next,1/3] net: stmmac: enable multiple buffers
Às 5:17 PM de 3/24/2017, David Miller escreveu:
> From: Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 15:02:27 +0000
>
>> Yes, I agree, it is better to revert and leave the tree functional for all.
>>
>> @David Miller:
>> The multiple-buffer patch introduced some problems in some setups that are being
>> hard to debug, so Corentin gave the idea of reverting the until
>> commit 7bac4e1ec3ca2342929a39638d615c6b672c27a0 (net: stmmac: stmmac interrupt
>> treatment prepared for multiple queues), which I fully agree.
>>
>> In my setup is ok, but the idea is to have everyone's setup working :), so lets
>> break them into smaller pieces, and let's only apply them when everyone confirms
>> that is working ok in your setups, agree?
>>
>> What is the typical mechanism for this? I send a patch reverting them?
>
> If you can compose a single "git revert" command to achieve this, just
> tell me what it is and I'll do it.
>
> Otherwise send a patch that does the revert.
Ok, I sent 2 patches with fixes. Let's see if you get some happy clients.
If not, I will inform the commit id to revert.
Thanks David.
>
> Thanks.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists