Re: [net-next v2 00/14][pull request] Intel Wired LAN Driver Updates

[Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2010 bytes --]

On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 15:53 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 07:22:23 -0700
> 
> > This series contains updates to i40e only.
> > 
> > Jesse provides 6 patches against i40e.  First is a patch to reduce
> > CPU utilization by reducing read-flush to read in the hot path.  Next
> > couple of patches resolve coverity issues reported by Hannes Frederic
> > Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>.  Then Jesse refactored i40e to cleanup
> > functions which used cpu_to_xxx(foo) which caused a lot of line wrapping.
> > 
> > Mitch provides 2 i40e patches.  First fixes a panic when tx_rings[0]
> > are not allocated, his second patch corrects a math error when
> > assigning MSI-X vectors to VFs.  The vectors-per-vf value reported
> > by the hardware already conveniently reports one less than the actual
> > value.
> > 
> > Shannon provides 5 patches against i40e.  His first patch corrects a
> > number of little bugs in the error handling of irq setup, most of
> > which ended up panicing the kernel.  Next he fixes the overactive
> > IRQ issue seen in testing and allows the use of the legacy interrupt.
> > Shannon then provides a cleanup of the arguments declared at the
> > beginning of each function.  Then he provides a patch to make sure
> > that there are really rings and queues before trying to dump
> > information in them.  Lastly he simplifies the code by using an
> > already existing variable.
> > 
> > Catherine provides an i40e patch to bump the version.
> 
> Pulled, thanks Jeff.
> 
> Just a note for the future, and I decided not to push back this time when
> I saw it in this series.  When you have a construct like:
> 
> 	if (x)
> 		for( ... ) {
> 		}
> 
> Put the top-level condition in braces too as it's much easier to read
> and audit:
> 
> 	if (x) {
> 		for ( ... ) {
> 		}
> 	}
> 
> Thanks.

I agree, I will add that to my list of checks for the future.  Thanks
Dave.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]