From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: [Fwd: Re: wan/pc300 bug found] Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 09:42:07 -0500 Message-ID: <4559D5BF.3080605@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------020402090302070305080504" Cc: Netdev List Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:15806 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965904AbWKNOmM (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Nov 2006 09:42:12 -0500 To: Krzysztof Halasa , Francois Romieu Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------020402090302070305080504 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit FYI... I'm certainly willing to remove pc300, if nobody wants it. But I am unsure whether this is a case of "vendor doesn't care" or "users don't care", which are two very different things... Jeff --------------020402090302070305080504 Content-Type: message/rfc822; name="Re: wan/pc300 bug found" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Re: wan/pc300 bug found" X-Account-Key: account2 Return-path: Envelope-to: jeff@garzik.org Delivery-date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:54:49 +0000 Received: from srv1.dvmed.net ([207.234.209.181]) by mail.dvmed.net with esmtps (Exim 4.62 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1GjwsL-0006pw-GS for jeff@garzik.org; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:54:49 +0000 Received: from mail2.avocent.com ([198.177.232.249] helo=mail.avocent.com) by srv1.dvmed.net with esmtp (Exim 4.62 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1GjwrB-00044G-Ch for jeff@garzik.org; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:53:53 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: wan/pc300 bug found Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 05:43:29 -0600 Message-ID: <1EF69AC43C5ABC49985E42B84575ADB7091CEA8E@hsv-email.corp.avocent.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: wan/pc300 bug found Thread-Index: AcblkTj6NhhyxYZlRcSWtJWgKaakzAiT9HkW References: <20061001163559.GA8649@havoc.gtf.org> From: "Squassoni, Daniela" To: "Jeff Garzik" Cc: "Rosalino, Wanda" X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.7 on srv1.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-2.6 points, 5.0 required) Jeff, As PC300 is not being produced anymore, we decided that the best = solution is to remove its driver from the kernel. I will send you a = patch to do so, as soon as possible. Best regards, Daniela -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Garzik [mailto:jeff@garzik.org] Sent: Sun 10/1/2006 1:35 PM To: pc300@cyclades.com; khc@pm.waw.pl; netdev@vger.kernel.org; LKML; = Andrew Morton Subject: wan/pc300 bug found =20 The following gcc warning indicates a bug: drivers/net/wan/pc300_drv.c: In function 'cpc_open': drivers/net/wan/pc300_drv.c:2870: warning: 'br' may be used = uninitialized in this function clock_rate_calc() is not checked for a negative return value. --------------020402090302070305080504--