From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix (was: Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:27:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <47FBD34A.6080508@garzik.org> <20080408203314.GA28952@elte.hu> <47FBDBE9.9040700@garzik.org> <47FBDBE9.9040700@garzik.org> <20080409193850.GA11763@elte.hu> <200804092249.23111.elendil@planet.nl> <20080410175503.GA11440@colo.lackof.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Krzysztof Halasa , Frans Pop , Ingo Molnar , jeff@garzik.org, matthew@wil.cx, auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, akpm@linux-foundation.org, davem@davemloft.net, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, john.ronciak@intel.com, bruce.w.allan@intel.com, greg@kroah.com, arjan@linux.intel.com, rjw@sisk.pl To: Grant Grundler Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080410175503.GA11440@colo.lackof.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Grant Grundler wrote: > > If e1000e is not getting compiled, my understanding was the original e1000 > driver will claim whatever devices it historically has. Yes. And the patch to do so was done by yours truly, exactly because I hit this thing ;) But it only works when the e1000e driver isn't enabled at all, which is why the "e1000e=m" case ends up being different, and Ingo then hit that one. Linus