Re: [PATCH 2/2] ethernet: igb: e1000_phy: Check for ops.force_speed_duplex existence

2021-01-19 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Tue, 19 Jan 2021 07:55:19 +0100 Paul Menzel wrote: > Am 05.01.21 um 18:25 schrieb Greg KH: > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 06:16:59PM +0100, Paul Menzel wrote: > >> Am 03.11.20 um 19:39 schrieb Jakub Kicinski: > >>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 08:35:09 +0100 Paul Menzel wrote: > According to *Deve

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ethernet: igb: e1000_phy: Check for ops.force_speed_duplex existence

2021-01-18 Thread Paul Menzel
Dear Jakub, dear Greg, Am 05.01.21 um 18:25 schrieb Greg KH: On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 06:16:59PM +0100, Paul Menzel wrote: Am 03.11.20 um 19:39 schrieb Jakub Kicinski: On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 08:35:09 +0100 Paul Menzel wrote: According to *Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1* [3], it’s my unde

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ethernet: igb: e1000_phy: Check for ops.force_speed_duplex existence

2021-01-05 Thread Greg KH
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 06:16:59PM +0100, Paul Menzel wrote: > Dear Jakub, dear Greg, > > > Am 03.11.20 um 19:39 schrieb Jakub Kicinski: > > On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 08:35:09 +0100 Paul Menzel wrote: > > > According to *Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1* [3], it’s my > > > understanding, that it is

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ethernet: igb: e1000_phy: Check for ops.force_speed_duplex existence

2021-01-05 Thread Paul Menzel
Dear Jakub, dear Greg, Am 03.11.20 um 19:39 schrieb Jakub Kicinski: On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 08:35:09 +0100 Paul Menzel wrote: According to *Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1* [3], it’s my understanding, that it is *not* required. The items (a), (b), and (c) are connected by an *or*.

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ethernet: igb: e1000_phy: Check for ops.force_speed_duplex existence

2020-11-03 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 08:35:09 +0100 Paul Menzel wrote: > According to *Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1* [3], it’s my > understanding, that it is *not* required. The items (a), (b), and (c) > are connected by an *or*. > > > (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ethernet: igb: e1000_phy: Check for ops.force_speed_duplex existence

2020-11-02 Thread Paul Menzel
Dear Jakub, Am 03.11.20 um 01:19 schrieb Jakub Kicinski: On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 00:13:07 +0100 Paul Menzel wrote: From: Jeffrey Townsend The ops field might no be defined, so add a check. This change should be first, otherwise AFAIU if someone builds the kernel in between the commits (e.g. fo

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ethernet: igb: e1000_phy: Check for ops.force_speed_duplex existence

2020-11-02 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 00:13:07 +0100 Paul Menzel wrote: > From: Jeffrey Townsend > > The ops field might no be defined, so add a check. This change should be first, otherwise AFAIU if someone builds the kernel in between the commits (e.g. for bisection) it will crash. > The patch is taken from Op

[PATCH 2/2] ethernet: igb: e1000_phy: Check for ops.force_speed_duplex existence

2020-11-02 Thread Paul Menzel
From: Jeffrey Townsend The ops field might no be defined, so add a check. The patch is taken from Open Network Linux (ONL), and it was added there as part of the patch packages/base/any/kernels/3.16+deb8/patches/driver-support-intel-igb-bcm5461X-phy.patch in ONL commit f32316c63c (Support