From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kok, Auke" Subject: Re: [PATCH][E1000E] some cleanups Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:02:10 -0700 Message-ID: <470BA602.7060400@intel.com> References: <1191174077.6165.11.camel@localhost> <47028351.7090509@intel.com> <1191417498.4357.23.camel@localhost> <1191773723.4394.31.camel@localhost> <470AB1EC.2080000@intel.com> <1191936581.4373.192.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: hadi@cyberus.ca Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:18101 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753602AbXJIQCh (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Oct 2007 12:02:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1191936581.4373.192.camel@localhost> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org jamal wrote: > On Mon, 2007-08-10 at 15:40 -0700, Kok, Auke wrote: > >> My biggest problem with the patch as you sent it that it's a tonload of changes >> and no implicit benefit immediately as I can see. > > The patch looks scary but is pretty tame when you apply it and stare at > it. > >> I would really have to see the >> LLTX change as well to make a wellfounded decision whether it is the right thing >> to go and overhaul this part of the driver or not :) >> >> I'm not particularly against the changes per se though. >> >> so please, if needed offlist send me those LLTX changes as well. > > Dont worry about it - i didnt get any love for a similar patch i did for > tg3 either ;-> I will hold onto it for now. I could do the un-LLTX > outside of this - would you like that for both e1000/e1000e ? if we're going to remove LLTX from e1000 I prefer to do that at a much later time. Let's focus on e1000e instead - while it is still moving ;) Auke