From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King Subject: Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] remove drivers/net/eepro100.c Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 22:24:10 +0000 Message-ID: <20051123222410.GN15449@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20051118033302.GO11494@stusta.de> <20051118090158.GA11621@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <437DFD6C.1020106@pobox.com> <20051123221547.GM15449@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: To: Jeff Garzik , Adrian Bunk , saw@saw.sw.com.sg, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051123221547.GM15449@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 10:15:48PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 11:12:28AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Russell King wrote: > > >On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 04:33:02AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > > >>This patch removes the obsolete drivers/net/eepro100.c driver. > > >> > > >>Is there any reason why it should be kept? > > > > > > > > >Tt's the only driver which works correctly on ARM CPUs. e100 is > > >basically buggy. This has been discussed here on lkml and more > > >recently on linux-netdev. If anyone has any further questions > > >please read the archives of those two lists. > > > > After reading the archives, one discovers the current status is: > > > > waiting on ARM folks to test e100 > > > > Latest reference is public message-id <4371A373.6000308@pobox.com>, > > which was CC'd to you. > > > > There is a patch in netdev-2.6.git#e100-sbit and in Andrew's -mm tree > > that should solve the ARM problems, and finally allow us to kill > > eepro100. But it's waiting for feedback... > > Well, I've run 2.6.15-rc2 on what I think was the ARM platform which > exhibited the problem, but it doesn't show up. However, that's > meaningless as it has been literally _years_ (4 or more) since the > problem was reported. It's rather unsurprising that I can't reproduce > it - I don't even know if I'm using the right processor module! Additionally, looking back at my 30th June 2004 message, I don't think I've even managed sufficient testing to make any claim of working-ness or non-working-ness against either driver. The test was merely a "did it successfully BOOTP" because I can't get it to mount and run /sbin/init from the jffs2 rootfs which 2.5.70 was perfectly happy to earlier today. However, the failure point seemed to be when NFS tried to use the card. Whether that means I was or was not using BOOTP back in 2004... your guess is as good as mine. Anyway, that's the end of the issue as far as I'm concerned. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core