> > Hmm, I didn't see where this code got moved to...
>
>Ah, it's the duplicated code... you should've either explicitly
> stated that in the change log or done this in a separate patch, I
> think.
Hi Sergei
Maybe you should read the comments I made :-)
Andrew
On 09/03/2016 10:23 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
The /proc/irq/xx information is incorrect for smsc911x because
the request_irq is happening before the register_netdev has the
proper device name. Moving it to the open also fixes the case
of when the device is renamed.
Reported-by: Will Deacon
Si
On 09/01/2016 11:15 PM, Jeremy Linton wrote:
The /proc/irq/xx information is incorrect for smsc911x because
the request_irq is happening before the register_netdev has the
proper device name. Moving it to the open also fixes the case
of when the device is renamed.
Reported-by: Will Deacon
Sign
On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 03:15:09PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> The /proc/irq/xx information is incorrect for smsc911x because
> the request_irq is happening before the register_netdev has the
> proper device name. Moving it to the open also fixes the case
> of when the device is renamed.
>
> Rep
The /proc/irq/xx information is incorrect for smsc911x because
the request_irq is happening before the register_netdev has the
proper device name. Moving it to the open also fixes the case
of when the device is renamed.
Reported-by: Will Deacon
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton
---
drivers/net/ether
On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 03:15:09PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> The /proc/irq/xx information is incorrect for smsc911x because
> the request_irq is happening before the register_netdev has the
> proper device name. Moving it to the open also fixes the case
> of when the device is renamed.
>
> Rep
