Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000

view
thread

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>

Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...>, Kok, Auke <auke-jan.h.kok@...>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@...>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>, NetDev <netdev@...>, e1000-list <e1000-devel@...>, linux-pci maillist <linux-pci@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, David S. Miller <davem@...>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>, Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...>, Ronciak, John <john.ronciak@...>, Allan, Bruce W <bruce.w.allan@...>, Greg KH <greg@...>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...>, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>

Subject: Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000

Date: Friday, April 11, 2008 - 11:40 am

Ingo Molnar wrote:

quoted text> well, your 2.6.26 plans, if i understand them correctly, is to move 
> currently working PCI IDs from e1000 to e1000e, like you attempted to d 
> it in v2.6.24, which Linus reverted - correct? I.e. e1000 simply wont 
> support eth0 on my T60 from 2.6.26 on? That is still an incredibly 
> stupid plan, and no amount of announcement on lkml will make it any less 
> stupid.

It seems like you're saying that once hardware is supported by a 
particular config option, it can never ever be split out to another 
config option, even if it makes both drivers cleaner.

A similar situation happened when the sk98lin driver was split into skge 
and sky2...I don't remember a big fuss back then.  Is it just that no 
major developers were using the hardware so they didn't notice?

Chris
--
unsubscribe noticeTo unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:

[regression] e1000e broke e1000 (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] e1000 t..., Ingo Molnar, (Tue Apr 8, 2:39 pm)

RE: [regression] e1000e broke e1000 (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] e10..., Brandeburg, Jesse, (Tue Apr 8, 3:43 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000 (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] e10..., Ingo Molnar, (Tue Apr 8, 3:59 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000 (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] e10..., Matthew Wilcox, (Tue Apr 8, 4:04 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000 (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] e10..., Ingo Molnar, (Tue Apr 8, 4:17 pm)

showing which hardware is unclaimed, Rick Jones, (Tue Apr 8, 4:13 pm)

Re: showing which hardware is unclaimed, Martin Mares, (Tue Apr 8, 4:35 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Dan Noe, (Tue Apr 8, 4:12 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Matthew Wilcox, (Tue Apr 8, 4:20 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Dan Noe, (Tue Apr 8, 4:39 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Ingo Molnar, (Tue Apr 8, 4:35 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Martin Mares, (Tue Apr 8, 4:36 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000 (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] e10..., Matthew Wilcox, (Tue Apr 8, 3:32 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000 (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] e10..., Ingo Molnar, (Tue Apr 8, 3:51 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Bill Davidsen, (Wed Apr 9, 8:52 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 11, 4:59 am)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Jeff Garzik, (Tue Apr 8, 3:56 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Ingo Molnar, (Tue Apr 8, 4:06 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Kok, Auke, (Tue Apr 8, 4:31 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Ingo Molnar, (Wed Apr 9, 3:12 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Jeff Garzik, (Wed Apr 9, 3:33 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 11, 7:30 am)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Chris Friesen, (Fri Apr 11, 11:40 am)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Willy Tarreau, (Fri Apr 11, 3:29 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Jeff Garzik, (Tue Apr 8, 4:19 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Ingo Molnar, (Tue Apr 8, 4:33 pm)

Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Jeff Garzik, (Tue Apr 8, 4:56 pm)

[patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was: Re:..., Ingo Molnar, (Wed Apr 9, 3:38 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was:..., Frans Pop, (Wed Apr 9, 4:49 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was:..., Krzysztof Halasa, (Wed Apr 9, 7:59 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was:..., Linus Torvalds, (Wed Apr 9, 9:40 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was:..., Krzysztof Halasa, (Thu Apr 10, 5:57 am)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was:..., Linus Torvalds, (Thu Apr 10, 10:30 am)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was:..., Krzysztof Halasa, (Thu Apr 10, 5:35 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was:..., Grant Grundler, (Thu Apr 10, 1:55 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was:..., Linus Torvalds, (Thu Apr 10, 3:27 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was:..., Matthew Wilcox, (Thu Apr 10, 2:04 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Kok, Auke, (Thu Apr 10, 2:26 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Chris Friesen, (Thu Apr 10, 5:20 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Kok, Auke, (Wed Apr 9, 4:12 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Kok, Auke, (Thu Apr 10, 2:29 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Ingo Molnar, (Thu Apr 10, 3:27 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Kok, Auke, (Thu Apr 10, 5:23 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 11, 7:26 am)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Christoph Hellwig, (Fri Apr 11, 7:36 am)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 11, 8:16 am)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Kok, Auke, (Fri Apr 11, 12:22 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Martin Mares, (Fri Apr 11, 1:10 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Christoph Hellwig, (Fri Apr 11, 12:45 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Apr 11, 1:34 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Daniel Barkalow, (Fri Apr 11, 6:06 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Apr 11, 7:00 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Jeff Garzik, (Fri Apr 11, 7:43 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Linus Torvalds, (Sun Apr 13, 5:13 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Ingo Molnar, (Mon Jun 9, 3:24 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Ondrej Zary, (Sun Apr 13, 5:34 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Christoph Hellwig, (Sat Apr 12, 9:07 am)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, , (Fri Apr 11, 7:58 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Daniel Barkalow, (Fri Apr 11, 7:15 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Jeff Garzik, (Fri Apr 11, 6:21 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Daniel Barkalow, (Fri Apr 11, 7:05 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Matthew Wilcox, (Fri Apr 11, 1:53 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Apr 11, 2:51 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Dan Noe, (Fri Apr 11, 5:01 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Krzysztof Halasa, (Fri Apr 11, 4:22 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Apr 11, 4:29 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Matthew Wilcox, (Fri Apr 11, 3:01 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Apr 11, 4:21 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Willy Tarreau, (Fri Apr 11, 3:25 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Matthew Wilcox, (Fri Apr 11, 3:38 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Kok, Auke, (Fri Apr 11, 1:26 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Philip Craig, (Thu Apr 10, 8:46 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Randy Dunlap, (Thu Apr 10, 5:44 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Andi Kleen, (Fri Apr 11, 3:54 am)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Kok, Auke, (Thu Apr 10, 5:52 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Ingo Molnar, (Wed Apr 9, 4:53 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Jeff Garzik, (Wed Apr 9, 3:50 pm)

Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix, Ingo Molnar, (Wed Apr 9, 4:04 pm)

Re: [E1000-devel] [regression] e1000e broke e1000, Kok, Auke, (Tue Apr 8, 4:47 pm)

Navigation

Popular discussions


linux-kernel:
Greg KH	[GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24
debian developer	Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
Vu Pham	Re: [Scst-devel] Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel
Adrian Bunk	Re: Linux 2.6.21
git:

linux-netdev:
Gerrit Renker	[PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options
Jarek Poplawski	[PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock().
Radu Rendec	Endianness problem with u32 classifier hash masks
Benjamin Herrenschmidt	[PATCH 0/11] ibm_newemac: Candidate patches for 2.6.25
openbsd-misc:

Colocation donated by:

Online users

jraval618

Syndicate