From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Taku Izumi Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] e1000e,igb,ixgbe: add registers etc. printout code just before resetting adapters Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:16:56 +0900 Message-ID: <4B7E48F8.7010208@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <4B593B74.2020601@jp.fujitsu.com> <4B5EC215.5090509@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "Allan, Bruce W" , "David S. Miller" , "Ronciak, John" , "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" , "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" , Koki Sanagi , Kenji Kaneshige , "chavey@google.com" , "e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" To: "Brandeburg, Jesse" Return-path: Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:42462 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754810Ab0BSIRP (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Feb 2010 03:17:15 -0500 Received: from m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.75]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id o1J8HDwJ019225 for (envelope-from izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com); Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:17:14 +0900 Received: from smail (m5 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA6B945DE57 for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:17:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.95]) by m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F32F45DE54 for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:17:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1174FE1800A for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:17:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.103]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6F2EE18004 for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:17:12 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Jesse, > I have a counter proposal to make, here is a (incomplete) patch that we > use all the time to debug tx hangs. This example is for e1000e. We are > trying to avoid changes with other users' copyright to some of the files > in our drivers so that we can ship them under multiple license. We would > much prefer something like this to be used, can you review? I haven't understood yet about the reason we have to avoid changing some files. Are there any files (header files?) we can't modify? Best regards, Taku Izumi