From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] tg3: Avoid Send BD corruption Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:30:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20080911.163020.209586511.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1221173758.12785.32.camel@HP1> <20080911.160117.118147467.davem@davemloft.net> <1221175168.12785.40.camel@HP1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mcarlson@broadcom.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, andy@greyhouse.net To: mchan@broadcom.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:44308 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752490AbYIKXa0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Sep 2008 19:30:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1221175168.12785.40.camel@HP1> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: "Michael Chan" Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:19:28 -0700 > OK, we'll resubmit this for net-next then. But I still think this one > should qualify. We do internal testing to find as many problems as > possible so that real users don't see too many of them. If driver authors can do these kinds of things to their heart's content, and then submit lots of patches fixing all the bugs they find, where are we able to draw the line? That's the problem. And right now my (and Linus's) solution is to push back and say no unless it meets strict criteria.