From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
"Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
NetDev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
e1000-list <e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
linux-pci maillist <linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
"Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@intel.com>,
"Allan, Bruce W" <bruce.w.allan@intel.com>,
Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Subject: Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:43:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47FFF7B5.3000609@garzik.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0804111556200.3143@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> .. but that said, I think your patch is certainly better than what we have
> now (or what Ingo was complaining about for the next merge window). I
> certainly could live with it. I would just suggest against ever then
> removing that "generic E1000" choice.
You mean never ever remove PCI-E support from e1000?
Won't that will inflict long term headaches on the people that matter
most -- users and maintainers -- to avoid short term headaches for
kernel power users?
To review the overall situation,
* e1000 supports so many chips, that making a change for new hardware in
e1000 involves breaking stability of older chips
* //You know this// from past kernel history, when late-breaking e1000
changes for new hardware wound up breaking working setups on multiple
occasions
* There is 100% agreement that e1000 is a maintenance nightmare, from
the people who actually touch the code (or even read it).
* Therefore, e1000e receives new h/w support and new devel, leaving
e1000 to sit and be stable
However, due to a mistake now released to the public -- a tiny few PCI-E
chips are supported by e1000 -- you have a widely disparate feature set:
e1000, old chips: full support
e1000, a few PCI-E chips: basic support
e1000e, all PCI-E chips: full support
Since e1000e is all new and fancy AND CLEAN, the code for the same chips
is different -- thus Intel must make every PCI-E fix _twice_.
It also means WE HAVE TO KEEP TOUCHING E1000, while supporting PCI-E
chips. After this PCI-E issue is resolved, I want to let e1000 sit and
be stable and not be touched.
For a temporary situation, this is fine. Give me transition
suggestions, please!
For a permanent situation, that sucks.
Distros will ship e1000 sans PCI-E support, which means you are asking
that PCI-E support be maintained indefinitely, purely for the few kernel
hackers that still use it?
I __don't care__ how we get there, but a permanent situation where e1000
continues to support a few PCI-E chips in basic mode seems the least
desireable of all available options.
Wait six months? Sure. Whatever. As long as we get to where we can
disable PCI-E support in e1000.
Jeff
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
"Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
e1000-list <e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
NetDev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>,
"Allan, Bruce W" <bruce.w.allan@intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
"Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@intel.com>,
Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
linux-pci maillist <linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Subject: Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:43:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47FFF7B5.3000609@garzik.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0804111556200.3143@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> .. but that said, I think your patch is certainly better than what we have
> now (or what Ingo was complaining about for the next merge window). I
> certainly could live with it. I would just suggest against ever then
> removing that "generic E1000" choice.
You mean never ever remove PCI-E support from e1000?
Won't that will inflict long term headaches on the people that matter
most -- users and maintainers -- to avoid short term headaches for
kernel power users?
To review the overall situation,
* e1000 supports so many chips, that making a change for new hardware in
e1000 involves breaking stability of older chips
* //You know this// from past kernel history, when late-breaking e1000
changes for new hardware wound up breaking working setups on multiple
occasions
* There is 100% agreement that e1000 is a maintenance nightmare, from
the people who actually touch the code (or even read it).
* Therefore, e1000e receives new h/w support and new devel, leaving
e1000 to sit and be stable
However, due to a mistake now released to the public -- a tiny few PCI-E
chips are supported by e1000 -- you have a widely disparate feature set:
e1000, old chips: full support
e1000, a few PCI-E chips: basic support
e1000e, all PCI-E chips: full support
Since e1000e is all new and fancy AND CLEAN, the code for the same chips
is different -- thus Intel must make every PCI-E fix _twice_.
It also means WE HAVE TO KEEP TOUCHING E1000, while supporting PCI-E
chips. After this PCI-E issue is resolved, I want to let e1000 sit and
be stable and not be touched.
For a temporary situation, this is fine. Give me transition
suggestions, please!
For a permanent situation, that sucks.
Distros will ship e1000 sans PCI-E support, which means you are asking
that PCI-E support be maintained indefinitely, purely for the few kernel
hackers that still use it?
I __don't care__ how we get there, but a permanent situation where e1000
continues to support a few PCI-E chips in basic mode seems the least
desireable of all available options.
Wait six months? Sure. Whatever. As long as we get to where we can
disable PCI-E support in e1000.
Jeff
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-11 23:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 125+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-04 21:11 [ANNOUNCE] e1000 to e1000e migration of PCI Express devices Kok, Auke
2008-04-04 21:11 ` Kok, Auke
2008-04-04 21:31 ` Dave Hansen
2008-04-04 21:49 ` [E1000-devel] " Kok, Auke
2008-04-04 21:52 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-04-04 21:52 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-04-08 8:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 14:21 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-04-08 15:08 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-04-08 14:56 ` Andi Kleen
2008-04-08 14:56 ` Andi Kleen
2008-04-08 16:18 ` Kok, Auke
2008-04-08 18:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 18:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 18:39 ` [regression] e1000e broke e1000 (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] e1000 to e1000e migration of PCI Express devices) Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 18:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 19:32 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-08 19:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 19:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 19:56 ` [regression] e1000e broke e1000 Jeff Garzik
2008-04-08 20:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 20:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 20:19 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-04-08 20:19 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-04-08 20:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 20:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 20:47 ` [E1000-devel] " Kok, Auke
2008-04-08 20:56 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-04-09 19:38 ` [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was: Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000) Ingo Molnar
2008-04-09 19:50 ` [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix Jeff Garzik
2008-04-09 20:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-09 20:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-09 20:12 ` Kok, Auke
2008-04-09 20:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-09 20:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-10 18:29 ` Kok, Auke
2008-04-10 19:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-10 19:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-10 21:23 ` Kok, Auke
2008-04-10 21:44 ` Randy Dunlap
2008-04-10 21:52 ` Kok, Auke
2008-04-11 7:54 ` Andi Kleen
2008-04-11 0:46 ` Philip Craig
2008-04-11 11:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-11 11:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-11 11:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-04-11 12:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-11 12:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-11 16:22 ` Kok, Auke
2008-04-11 16:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-04-11 17:26 ` Kok, Auke
2008-04-11 17:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-11 17:53 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-11 18:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-11 18:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-11 19:01 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-11 19:25 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-04-11 19:25 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-04-11 19:38 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-11 20:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-11 20:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-11 20:22 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2008-04-11 20:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-11 20:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-11 21:01 ` Dan Noe
2008-04-11 21:01 ` Dan Noe
2008-04-11 22:06 ` Daniel Barkalow
2008-04-11 22:21 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-04-11 23:05 ` Daniel Barkalow
2008-04-11 23:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-11 23:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-11 23:15 ` Daniel Barkalow
2008-04-11 23:15 ` Daniel Barkalow
2008-04-11 23:43 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2008-04-11 23:43 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-04-11 23:58 ` david
2008-04-12 13:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-04-13 21:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-13 21:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-13 21:34 ` Ondrej Zary
2008-06-09 19:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-09 19:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-11 17:10 ` Martin Mares
2008-04-09 20:49 ` [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was: Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000) Frans Pop
2008-04-09 20:49 ` Frans Pop
2008-04-09 23:59 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2008-04-10 1:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-10 1:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-10 9:57 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2008-04-10 14:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-10 14:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-04-10 17:55 ` Grant Grundler
2008-04-10 18:04 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-10 18:26 ` [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix Kok, Auke
2008-04-10 21:20 ` Chris Friesen
2008-04-10 19:27 ` [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was: Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000) Linus Torvalds
2008-04-10 21:35 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2008-04-10 21:35 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2008-04-08 20:31 ` [regression] e1000e broke e1000 Kok, Auke
2008-04-09 19:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-09 19:33 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-04-11 11:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-11 15:40 ` Chris Friesen
2008-04-11 19:29 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-04-10 0:52 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-04-11 8:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 19:43 ` [regression] e1000e broke e1000 (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] e1000 toe1000e migration of PCI Express devices) Brandeburg, Jesse
2008-04-08 19:43 ` Brandeburg, Jesse
2008-04-08 19:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 20:04 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-08 20:12 ` [regression] e1000e broke e1000 Dan Noe
2008-04-08 20:12 ` Dan Noe
2008-04-08 20:20 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-08 20:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 20:36 ` Martin Mares
2008-04-08 20:36 ` Martin Mares
2008-04-08 20:39 ` Dan Noe
2008-04-08 20:39 ` Dan Noe
2008-04-08 20:13 ` showing which hardware is unclaimed Rick Jones
2008-04-08 20:35 ` Martin Mares
2008-04-08 20:35 ` Martin Mares
2008-04-08 20:17 ` [regression] e1000e broke e1000 (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] e1000 toe1000e migration of PCI Express devices) Ingo Molnar
2008-04-08 20:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-09 19:08 ` [ANNOUNCE] e1000 to e1000e migration of PCI Express devices Ingo Molnar
2008-04-09 19:38 ` Andi Kleen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47FFF7B5.3000609@garzik.org \
--to=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com \
--cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=bruce.w.allan@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=john.ronciak@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.