From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] [resend] Add configuration options to disable features not needed on embedded devices Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 03:02:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20080731.030205.153067850.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1217497912.3454.95.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20080731.025547.35826309.davem@davemloft.net> <1217498355.3454.103.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1217498355.3454.103.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Sender: linux-embedded-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" To: dwmw2@infradead.org Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, michael@free-electrons.com From: David Woodhouse Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:59:15 +0100 > I have drivers which don't even _have_ ethtool support, and they seem to > work fine. But leaving aside the debate on that point, your statement > also seemed to be covering the other patches, such as the IGMP one and > others which haven't been seen (or perhaps even imagined) yet. I explained why I didn't want to apply the IGMP one too. Andrew didn't like my objections, but that doesn't mean I need to defend my position further. Show me a size reduction patch for networking that actually makes real sense and I'll apply it.