From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761945AbYA3Qfr (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:35:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760318AbYA3QfT (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:35:19 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:45837 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760852AbYA3QfR (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:35:17 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,278,1199692800"; d="scan'208";a="294378373" Message-ID: <47A0A713.7030304@intel.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:34:27 -0800 From: "Kok, Auke" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071125) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: andi@lisas.de CC: e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bunk@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] e100 driver didn't support any MII-less PHYs... References: <20071228235118.GA31059@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> <477732A5.5020501@intel.com> <20080101200908.GA14805@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> <20080129230315.GA13389@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> <479FB225.7090604@intel.com> <20080130064909.GA19793@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> In-Reply-To: <20080130064909.GA19793@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jan 2008 16:35:15.0250 (UTC) FILETIME=[17818920:01C8635E] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andreas Mohr wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 03:09:25PM -0800, Kok, Auke wrote: >> Andreas Mohr wrote: >>> Perhaps it's useful to file a bug/patch >>> on http://sourceforge.net/projects/e1000/ ? Perhaps -mm testing? >> I wanted to push this though our testing labs first which has not happened due to >> time constraints - that should quickly at least confirm that the most common nics >> work OK after the change with your patch. I'll try and see if we can get this >> testing done soon. > > Oh, full-scale regression testing even? Nice idea... > Would optionally be even better if during hardware tests one could also > dig out some i82503-based card (or additional MII-less cards?) > since I didn't really make any effort yet to try to make them all > recognized/supported by my patch already (would have been out of scope anyway > since I have this single card only). the problem is that I think that most of those (mii-less cards) are customly designed by OEM's that buy the silicon and glue on a different interface and we usually do not carry those designs in our labs apart from a few exceptions. So, I can at least touch the common hardware in testing, but not the exotic stuff. Auke