Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix
- From: Ondrej Zary <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 23:34:14 +0200
On Sunday 13 April 2008 23:13:01 Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Linus Torvalds wrote:
.. but that said, I think your patch is certainly better than what we
have now (or what Ingo was complaining about for the next merge
window). I certainly could live with it. I would just suggest against
ever then removing that "generic E1000" choice.
You mean never ever remove PCI-E support from e1000?
No. I mean never ever remove the *configure* level thinking that "e1000 is
e1000".
There is no sense in *ever* showing it as two drivers to users, because
users do not see them as separate chipsets. They look identical, down to
the part names.
If it's a single family, and users can't even easily tell whether they
have version 1 or version 2 (PCI vs PCI-E), you shouldn't even ask them.
You should literally ask them: "do you want e1000 support".
It's something like RTL8139. There are two versions of the chips. They even
have the same PCI IDs. But there are two different drivers - 8139cp and
8139too. It's really bad for users
That's it.
Once you have asked them that, you can then decide "ok, if you *really*
know what version of the chip you have, you can decide to only get limited
driver support".
But that's a secondary thing from a user perspective.
See the patch I already sent out.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Ondrej Zary
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000
- From: Jeff Garzik
- Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix
- From: Jeff Garzik
- Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix
- From: Linus Torvalds
- Re: [regression] e1000e broke e1000
- Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.25-rc6 regression - hang on resume
- Next by Date: Re: pci: add to global list before sysfs?
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix
- Next by thread: Re: [patch] e1000=y && e1000e=m regression fix
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
