From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Hutchings Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] net: fullly using NETIF_F_ALL_TSO Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 15:14:22 +0100 Message-ID: <1303481662.4129.24.camel@localhost> References: <4DB16187.2030904@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: eilong@broadcom.com, dm@chelsio.com, leedom@chelsio.com, benve@cisco.com, vkolluri@cisco.com, roprabhu@cisco.com, dwang2@cisco.com, ron.mercer@qlogic.com, linux-driver@qlogic.com, David Miller , hadi@cyberus.ca, netdev To: Shan Wei Return-path: Received: from exchange.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220]:43985 "EHLO exchange.solarflare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755876Ab1DVOO3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Apr 2011 10:14:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4DB16187.2030904@cn.fujitsu.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2011-04-22 at 19:07 +0800, Shan Wei wrote: > Fullly using NETIF_F_ALL_TSO. > And some code style tuning. Just compile test. [...] This is wrong. What if some other TSO feature is defined and added to NETIF_F_ALL_TSO later? (This is unlikely, but hopefully you see that it is conceptually wrong to claim 'all' features.) Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.