From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030456AbVKWWqw (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:46:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030457AbVKWWqv (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:46:51 -0500 Received: from mail.dvmed.net ([216.237.124.58]:31878 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030454AbVKWWqu (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:46:50 -0500 Message-ID: <4384F156.3080205@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:46:46 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Grover CC: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, john.ronciak@intel.com, christopher.leech@intel.com Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 2/3] ioat: user buffer pin; net DMA client register References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "srv2.dvmed.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: A per-patch description would be nice, as DaveM mentioned... and also please put a diffstat in each email. Jeff [...] Content analysis details: (0.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address [69.134.188.146 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org A per-patch description would be nice, as DaveM mentioned... and also please put a diffstat in each email. Jeff