| To: | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Corey Thomas <corey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Raylink/WebGear testing - ray_cs.c iomem bug? |
| From: | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:56:01 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.58.0410061032410.8290@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.58.0410061032410.8290@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> If somebody has access to this card and can test it, can you email me? I'd
> hate to apply even an "obvious" fix when the bug may be hidden by other
> bugs, and the obvious fix might end up breaking things for silly reasons.
Ahh. Never mind. It looks like the RCS/CCS difference is encoded in the
index that is used to offset the base, which means that rcs_base and
ccs_base really do end up being the same thing.
Still, I'd love to have somebody verify that the cleaned-up version
(without any changes) still works. It should be 100% equivalent to the old
one, but it's good to make sure.
Linus
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Raylink/WebGear testing - ray_cs.c iomem bug?, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Raylink/WebGear testing - ray_cs.c iomem bug?, Linus Torvalds |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Raylink/WebGear testing - ray_cs.c iomem bug?, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Raylink/WebGear testing - ray_cs.c iomem bug?, Jeff Garzik |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |