| To: | Tommy Christensen <tommy.christensen@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [patch 4/10] s390: network driver. |
| From: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 06 Jan 2005 08:58:32 -0500 |
| Cc: | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Spatzier <thomas.spatzier@xxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>, Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Paul Jakma <paul@xxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <41DC0931.80603@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | jamalopolous |
| References: | <OFB7F7E23F.EFB88418-ONC1256F7E.0031769E-C1256F7E.003270AD@xxxxxxxxxx> <1104764710.1048.580.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <41DB26A6.2070008@xxxxxxxxx> <1104895169.1117.63.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <41DC0931.80603@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | hadi@xxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 10:35, Tommy Christensen wrote: > jamal wrote: > > Except for the drivers that call netif_stop_queue() on link-down. These > calls (and the corresponding netif_wake_queue) would have to be removed. If we assume all drivers do: netif_stop then carrier_off then you dont need that extra check. Thats the working assumption i had - maybe a comment is deserving or we could say we dont think that all drivers are going to follow that sequence. cheers, jamal |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [patch 4/10] s390: network driver., jamal |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC] ematch API, u32 ematch, nbyte ematch, basic classifier, jamal |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [patch 4/10] s390: network driver., Tommy Christensen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [patch 4/10] s390: network driver., Tommy Christensen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |