On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 23:19 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012, Jeff Kirsher wrote: > > > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 22:23 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Wyborny, Carolyn wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Jesper Juhl [mailto:j...@chaosbits.net] > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 12:06 PM > > > > > To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > > > > Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; e1000-de...@lists.sourceforge.net; > > > Wyborny, Carolyn; Pieper, Jeffrey E; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; Rick Jones; > > > Ronciak, John; Brandeburg, Jesse; Allan, Bruce W; Skidmore, Donald C; > > > Rose, Gregory V; Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P; Duyck, Alexander H; David S. > > > Miller > > > > > Subject: [PATCH] igb: correct hardware type (i210/i211) check in > > > igb_loopback_test() > > > > > > > > > > In the original code > > > > > ... > > > > > if ((adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i210) > > > > > || (adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i210)) { ... > > > > > the second check of 'adapter->hw.mac.type' is pointless since it > > > tests for the exact same value as the first. > > > > > > > > > > After reading through a few other parts of the driver I believe > > > that the second check was actually intended to check for 'e1000_i211' > > > > > rather than 'e1000_i210', but I admit that I'm not certain so > > > someone with more knowledge about this driver should ACK the patch > > > before it gets merged. > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately I have no hardware to actually test this on, so it > > > is compile tested only. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <j...@chaosbits.net> > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c | 2 +- > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c > > > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c > > > > > index a19c84c..ad489b7 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c > > > > > @@ -1783,7 +1783,7 @@ static int igb_loopback_test(struct > > > igb_adapter *adapter, u64 *data) > > > > > goto out; > > > > > } > > > > > if ((adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i210) > > > > > - || (adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i210)) { > > > > > + || (adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i211)) { > > > > > dev_err(&adapter->pdev->dev, > > > > > "Loopback test not supported " > > > > > "on this part at this time.\n"); > > > > > -- > > > > > 1.7.11.3 > > > > > > > > > > > > > ACK. > > > > > > > > Good catch. Thanks Jesper! > > > > > > > > Carolyn > > > > > > > > Carolyn Wyborny > > > > Linux Development > > > > LAN Access Division > > > > Intel Corporation > > > > > > > Thank you for the ack Carolyn. > > > > > > David: will you take this in the networking tree? > > > > I have a few igb patches already, so I will send a pull request for Dave > > with this patch added to the igb patches I already have. Ok? > > > That's perfectly fine with me. > > Perhaps you could consider also picking up the other one I sent a few > minutes after this one ? > Subject: [PATCH] igb: don't break user visible strings over multiple lines > in igb_ethtool.c > Message-ID: <alpine.lnx.2.00.1207252115321.11...@swampdragon.chaosbits.net>
Done.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
