On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> e1000 driver update
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Signed-off-by: John Ronciak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Brandeburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Grumble! How many times has Intel been told to order fixes before new
features?
apologies, there aren't very many bug fixes in this release, most are new
hardware and new features.
I have multiple Intel folks emailing me privately about the urgency of
these fixes... and then I get a submission which contains changes
inappropriate for the current bug fixes-only Release Candidate cycle.
So please choose:
1) I merge these changes into 'upstream' branch, and e1000 misses 2.6.15
release.
We choose 1) Please merge these changes into upstream for 2.6.16, we
realize we missed the merge window for 2.6.15, but should have said so.
Our position is users who need the new hardware support or new features
now can download our driver tarball from sf.net/projects/e1000.
2) I drop these patches, wait for a bug fixes-only rediff+resend from
Intel, and e1000 makes 2.6.15.
If I generate some bug fix only patches for 6.1.16, destined for 2.6.15,
they will conflict with the "upstream" branch. Is that okay?
You requested in another email that I diff against vanilla 2.6.14, but
there are already e1000 changes accepted to 2.6.15 that may fuzz my
vanilla diff. I'm struggling how to deal with that.
Regenerating the 6.2.15 driver patches is a non-trival amount of work, but
we'll do it in the next merge window if we need to.
Thanks,
Jesse
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
