From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kok, Auke" Subject: Re: [PATCH][E1000E] some cleanups Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 10:43:45 -0700 Message-ID: <47028351.7090509@intel.com> References: <1191174077.6165.11.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Kok, Auke" , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: hadi@cyberus.ca Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:60857 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751817AbXJBRoo (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2007 13:44:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1191174077.6165.11.camel@localhost> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org jamal wrote: > Auke, > > heres part of something i promised. > I couldnt do any packet testing on because 82571EB is disabled in the > driver. I uncommented the code out in the table, but the best i could > get was the module loading, some probing and some sysfs renaming > failures (probably a debianism); the machine access is intermittent, so > thats as far as i could go. In any case, you probably have a good reason > for disabling that chip. So, heres the patch, the burden of testing now > falls on you ;-> the description of this patch is rather misleading, and the title certainly too. Can you resend this with a bit more elaborate explanation as to why the cb code is relevant to use here? Not only do I need to understand this, but others might want to as well later on ;) Cheers, Auke