* net_device->irq vs pci_dev->irq
@ 2004-07-29 3:45 Frank Cusack
2004-07-29 17:21 ` Jeff Garzik
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Frank Cusack @ 2004-07-29 3:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lkml
Sent this to linux-net@ with no response today, anyone care to comment?
In the e1000-5.2.30.1 driver, "they" no longer propagate pdev->irq into
netdev->irq. This looks safe to add back in, am I mistaken? I want
ifconfig to report the irq, which it no longer does without netdev->irq.
This is on a 2.4 kernel (no MSI).
thx
/fc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: net_device->irq vs pci_dev->irq
2004-07-29 3:45 net_device->irq vs pci_dev->irq Frank Cusack
@ 2004-07-29 17:21 ` Jeff Garzik
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Garzik @ 2004-07-29 17:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Frank Cusack; +Cc: lkml
Frank Cusack wrote:
> Sent this to linux-net@ with no response today, anyone care to comment?
netdev@oss.sgi.com is the best place for network stack/driver development.
> In the e1000-5.2.30.1 driver, "they" no longer propagate pdev->irq into
> netdev->irq. This looks safe to add back in, am I mistaken? I want
> ifconfig to report the irq, which it no longer does without netdev->irq.
netdev->irq is purely informational. Setting, or not, is largely
irrelevant these days.
Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-07-29 17:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-07-29 3:45 net_device->irq vs pci_dev->irq Frank Cusack
2004-07-29 17:21 ` Jeff Garzik
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox