From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Aaron Sierra <asierra@xes-inc.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 12:45:40 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 1/5] igb: Remove GS40G specific
	defines/functions
In-Reply-To: <1446797097.3515.5.camel@intel.com>
References: <624966880.305749.1446575829241.JavaMail.zimbra@xes-inc.com>
 <1446797097.3515.5.camel@intel.com>
Message-ID: <745006060.48564.1446835540714.JavaMail.zimbra@xes-inc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
List-ID: <intel-wired-lan.osuosl.org>

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Kirsher" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 2:04:57 AM
> 
> On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 12:37 -0600, Aaron Sierra wrote:
> > The I210 internal PHY can be accessed just as well with the access
> > functions shared by 82580, I350, and I354 devices. A side effect of
> > relying on the common functions, is that I210 cable length support
> > is folded back into the common case which effectively reverts the
> > following commit:
> > 
> > ??? commit 59f301046b276f87483b3afa3201a4273def06a9
> > ??? Author: Carolyn Wyborny <carolyn.wyborny@intel.com>
> > ??? Date:?? Wed Oct 10 04:42:59 2012 +0000
> > 
> > ??? igb: Update get cable length function for i210/i211
> > 
> > Cc: Carolyn Wyborny <carolyn.wyborny@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Aaron Sierra <asierra@xes-inc.com>
> > ---
> > ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/e1000_82575.c | 13 ++---
> > ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/e1000_i210.c? |? 5 +-
> > ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/e1000_i210.h? |? 2 +-
> > ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/e1000_phy.c?? | 82 +-----------------
> > ----------
> > ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/e1000_phy.h?? | 15 +----
> > ?5 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 106 deletions(-)
> 
> Other than patch 4 of your series, the rest of the series touch code
> which we "share" with our various other drivers. ?We would need you to
> assign copyright back to Intel for patches 1, 2, 3 & 5 so that would
> retain copyright on the changes so that we can re-license the changes
> for our other drivers.

That isn't a problem. Do you need a statement any more explicit or
official than that?

-Aaron