Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix

view
thread

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE

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

To: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...>

Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@...>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...>, Kok, Auke <auke-jan.h.kok@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>, NetDev <netdev@...>, e1000-list <e1000-devel@...>, linux-pci maillist <linux-pci@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, David S. Miller <davem@...>, 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: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix

Date: Friday, April 11, 2008 - 4:29 pm

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Krzysztof Halasa wrote:

quoted text> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> 
> > Nobody wants to care deeply whether it's a PCI-E or PCI chip. In fact, 
> > it's almost impossible to tell. Here, quickly, tell me which one mine is 
> > (this is from /sbin/lspci):
> >
> > 	00:19.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82566DM Gigabit Network Connection (rev 02)
> >
> > and tell me how you knew..
> 
> I guess PCIE. You already came across a similar problem.
> 
> Have I won something? :-)

Nope. You apparently guessed just because I had told earlier about how the 
E1000 changes screwed over my setup.

The fact is, people don't know. And they shouldn't care. If the E1000 
driver worked before, we simply shouldn't break that from a configuration 
standpoint.

			Linus
--
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:
Tarkan Erimer	Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
Greg KH	[GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24
James Bottomley	Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-))
Trent Piepho	Re: [PATCH] fakephp: Allocate PCI resources before adding the device
linux-netdev:
Antonio Almeida	HTB accuracy for high speed
David Miller	[GIT]: Networking
Gerrit Renker	[PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side)
Jarek Poplawski	[PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock().
git:

openbsd-misc:

Colocation donated by:

Online users

Syndicate