From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gerard DeRose Subject: Re: [PATCH] ethernet/atheros/alx: add Killer E2400 device ID Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 11:15:45 -0700 Message-ID: <564CC051.7030805@system76.com> References: <1447809667-9454-1-git-send-email-jason@system76.com> <564C84BF.1090202@cogentembedded.com> <564C90BB.2040104@system76.com> <564CB9C4.3030100@cogentembedded.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ben Pope To: Sergei Shtylyov , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail.system76.com ([38.75.196.72]:40435 "EHLO mail.system76.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755244AbbKRSPr (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2015 13:15:47 -0500 In-Reply-To: <564CB9C4.3030100@cogentembedded.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/18/2015 10:47 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > On 11/18/2015 05:52 PM, Jason Gerard DeRose wrote: > >>>> From: Ben Pope >>>> >>>> This patch adds the PCI device ID (0xe0a1) and alx_pci_tbl entry for >>>> the >>>> Killer E2400 Ethernet controller, modeled after the Killer E2200 >>>> controller support (0xe091) already present in the alx driver. >>>> >>>> This patch was originally authored by Ben Pope, but it got held up by >>>> issues in the commit message, so I'm resubmitting it on his behalf. >>>> >>>> I've extensively used a kernel with this patch on a System76 serw9 >>>> laptop and am quite confident it works well (at least on the hardware I >>>> have available for testing). >>>> >>>> Note that as a favor to System76, Ubuntu has been carrying this as a >>>> sauce patch in their 4.2 based Wily kernel, which presumably has given >>>> it real-world testing on other E2400 equipped hardware (I don't know of >>>> any Ubuntu kernel bugs filed about it): >>>> >>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1498633 >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jason Gerard DeRose >>> >>> No sign-off from Ben? >> >> Apologies, this is my first time submitting a kernel patch :) >> >> Should I use git send-email to send this again, > > I didn't notice if your mailer corrupted the patch but if it did > 'git send-email' should be used indeed. I originally used `git send-email`, so the patch should not have been corrupted. >> this time with the sign-off from Ben? > > No need to resend if it wasn't corrupted. Just replying to this > patch with his sign-off should be enough -- patchwork should collect the > tags from the follow-ups. Okay, thanks for the clarification! >> And if so, should I do so as a reply to this thread? > > No, not on this list. DaveM prefers the patch reposts to be done as > the fresh new postings. > >> Thanks for you time! > > Your, I guess? Not at all. :-) Also thank you for enduring my typos ;) > MBR, Sergei >