Re: [PATCH] Add eeprom_bad_csum_allow module option to e1000.

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <davej@...>
Cc: <jeff@...>, <auke-jan.h.kok@...>, <ajax@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <netdev@...>
Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 - 5:53 pm

From: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 17:20:26 -0400


Seconded.  The resistence to this patch is just flat-out rediculious,
just like it was in the e100 case.

And I think all of this "e1000 is different!" talk is merely a
scarecrow for the fact that Intel simply doesn't want this patch
merged for some other reason.
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] Add eeprom_bad_csum_allow module option to e1000., Adam Jackson, (Tue Oct 23, 10:58 am)
Re: [PATCH] Add eeprom_bad_csum_allow module option to e1000., Stephen Hemminger, (Tue Oct 23, 7:53 pm)
Re: [PATCH] Add eeprom_bad_csum_allow module option to e1000., David Miller, (Tue Oct 23, 5:53 pm)
[PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Jeff Garzik, (Tue Oct 23, 8:55 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Adrian Bunk, (Tue Oct 23, 9:15 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Jeff Garzik, (Tue Oct 23, 9:03 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, David Miller, (Tue Oct 23, 9:07 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Jeff Garzik, (Tue Oct 23, 10:20 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Stephen Hemminger, (Thu Nov 1, 2:11 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Jeff Garzik, (Thu Nov 1, 3:31 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, David Miller, (Tue Oct 23, 10:23 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Kok, Auke, (Thu Nov 1, 2:04 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Jeff Garzik, (Thu Nov 1, 2:47 pm)