Re: [PATCH 1/6] sfc: Correct address of gPXE boot configuration in EEPROM

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> Due to a hardware bug, the originally assigned range cannot reliably
>> be used for boot configuration and must not be modifiable through
>> ethtool.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/sfc/ethtool.c |    4 ++--
>>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/sfc/ethtool.c b/drivers/net/sfc/ethtool.c
>> index fa98af5..cd0d087 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/sfc/ethtool.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/sfc/ethtool.c
>> @@ -174,8 +174,8 @@ static struct efx_ethtool_stat efx_ethtool_stats[] 
>> = {
>>  
>>  /* EEPROM range with gPXE configuration */
>>  #define EFX_ETHTOOL_EEPROM_MAGIC 0xEFAB
>> -#define EFX_ETHTOOL_EEPROM_MIN 0x100U
>> -#define EFX_ETHTOOL_EEPROM_MAX 0x400U
>> +#define EFX_ETHTOOL_EEPROM_MIN 0x800U
>> +#define EFX_ETHTOOL_EEPROM_MAX 0x1800U
> 
> this seems like something for 2.6.28-rc not 2.6.29, so why wait for 2.6.29?

nevermind, I see the other patch now...