Linus Torvalds wrote:
my current status mail was posted earlier today to lkml from this
address, since then we've had a local reproduction and are going for
number two. The reproduction seems racy, i.e. it doesn't happen every
time, so we put it in a loop doing detect, check eeprom, detect, etc,
and we'll see if it fails.
Reproduction seems to consistently be around X probing time, no firm
leads yet. As for Intel we have keithp and jbarnes as well as arjan,
auke, myself and a few others involved.
We have some patches to lock the nvm down, we'll be posting those
tonight and tomorrow, I also have some debug logic (and fixes) to help
prove that we don't think it's a race in e1000e.
--
Jesse
--
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Stephen Rothwell | Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-)) |
| Vladislav Bolkhovitin | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
git: | |
| Arjan van de Ven | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 33/37] dccp: Initialisation framework for feature negotiation |
| Christoph Lameter | Network latency regressions from 2.6.22 to 2.6.29 |
