From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francois Romieu Subject: Re: r8169: IO_PAGE_FAULT & netdev watchdog Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 12:56:45 +0200 Message-ID: <20120602105645.GA28769@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> References: <201205312331.06623.plr.vincent@gmail.com> <20120601125949.GA11973@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> <201206021108.53551.plr.vincent@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Vincent Pelletier Return-path: Received: from violet.fr.zoreil.com ([92.243.8.30]:60344 "EHLO violet.fr.zoreil.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966282Ab2FBLFS (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Jun 2012 07:05:18 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201206021108.53551.plr.vincent@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Vincent Pelletier : [...] > So I went with 3.3.7, and patch failed to apply, at least partly because > 3.3.7 lacks "r8169: fix early queue wake-up."[1]. And partly because the patch I sent included its content in the commit message as well. :o/ > I solved the conflicts manually, but I'm not sure of the result. Could you > confirm attached patch might give expected result ? Yes. > Or should I stick to 3.4 and only test inlined patch ? If the inlined patch makes a difference, you should see it with 3.4. My life is a bit easier when you work somewhere in the main branch (or in davem's -next but it is not relevant for regression fixes). -- Ueimor