Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+2\/3\]\s+r8169\:\s+code\s+clean\-up\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+2\/3\]\s+r8169\:\s+code\s+clean\-up\s*$/: 26 ]

Total 26 documents matching your query.

1. [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: x>; Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:23:43 -0600; This patch removes netif_poll_disable if NAPI is not enabled (otherwise adapter will hang while changing MTUs). This patch also fixes a possible skb alignment overrun, and fixes the rx skb allocation; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00599.html (11,174 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: ankar <asimshankar@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:28:04 +0100; Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : I am currently running a non-napi r8169 on x86/sparc64 based on 2.6.11-rc4 + patches in Jeff's netdev and it apparently does not mind change of mtu. How am I supposed; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00629.html (11,958 bytes)
3. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: er@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 22:00:39 -0600; I can't seem to make it hang anymore. I guess I was wrong. Please remove this part of the patch. Sorry for the oversight, but I had the 2nd part in the jumbo frames patch. Actually, I think it should; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00631.html (13,601 bytes)
4. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 11:47:14 -0600; netdev Cc'ed per your suggestion. I've taken the liberity of removing all the patches, as they take up alot of space and look fine to me. Good work. [...] I never said it was pretty, simply a working; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00668.html (14,143 bytes)
5. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: kaber@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 23:30:12 +0100; Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : No, no, I meant mangled as in "kmail fcuked the tabs again". [...] Until there is a stability or performance reason for it, I will not take the change: - it would add; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00681.html (13,361 bytes)
6. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 17:52:51 +0000; Francois Romieu wrote: Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : [snip] adds a link down notification, and cleans up Ok. I'll netif_msg it before someone else complains that the driver is too verbose. [snip]; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00694.html (10,145 bytes)
7. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: xxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 12:04:23 -0600; Not 100% sure it is a kmail problem (as it could be my IMAP server). I'll trying a different mail clent, and see if that makes any difference. Thanks for the heads-up. Actually, I removed it and it c; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00695.html (17,045 bytes)
8. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: 棨鑻辨槑 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 12:14:15 -0600; Not to my knowledge. It would be nice if there was a wiki out there which lists all of the drivers and areas to work on (features enablement, open bugs, etc.) I know Francois likes it when people tes; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00696.html (10,006 bytes)
9. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: chmid <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 00:34:05 +0100; Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : It is an acceptable answer: the behavior changes. [...] AFAIKS, if the rx_copybreak fails, be it because the packet is too big or because the allocation failed, the c; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00703.html (12,871 bytes)
10. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: <ak@xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 01:28:27 +0100; Richard Dawe <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> : None so far. Go wild. (without priority) - validate suspend/resume/wol - fix the dac issues on x64 Weird. Pita. Status needs to be updated. - push jumbo fra; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00707.html (10,385 bytes)
11. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: eff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 21:40:48 -0600; Fix ethtool statistics (amd64 only problem?); /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00715.html (11,060 bytes)
12. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 22:54:23 -0600; You are correct, I misunderstood the error path of the previous rx_copy routine. My main problem with the above patch is that is assumes that there will be a maximum of 2 descriptors per jumbo frame; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00716.html (16,913 bytes)
13. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: @xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:16:19 +0100; Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : Where do you see such an assumption ? -- Ueimor; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00720.html (9,152 bytes)
14. [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:23:43 -0600; This patch removes netif_poll_disable if NAPI is not enabled (otherwise adapter will hang while changing MTUs). This patch also fixes a possible skb alignment overrun, and fixes the rx skb allocation; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01619.html (11,174 bytes)
15. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:28:04 +0100; Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : I am currently running a non-napi r8169 on x86/sparc64 based on 2.6.11-rc4 + patches in Jeff's netdev and it apparently does not mind change of mtu. How am I supposed; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01649.html (12,026 bytes)
16. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 22:00:39 -0600; I can't seem to make it hang anymore. I guess I was wrong. Please remove this part of the patch. Sorry for the oversight, but I had the 2nd part in the jumbo frames patch. Actually, I think it should; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01651.html (13,693 bytes)
17. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 11:47:14 -0600; netdev Cc'ed per your suggestion. I've taken the liberity of removing all the patches, as they take up alot of space and look fine to me. Good work. [...] I never said it was pretty, simply a working; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01688.html (14,355 bytes)
18. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 23:30:12 +0100; Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : [...] No, no, I meant mangled as in "kmail fcuked the tabs again". [...] Until there is a stability or performance reason for it, I will not take the change: - it wou; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01701.html (13,583 bytes)
19. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: Richard Dawe <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 17:52:51 +0000; Hello. Francois Romieu wrote: Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> : [snip] adds a link down notification, and cleans up Ok. I'll netif_msg it before someone else complains that the driver is too verbose.; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01714.html (10,212 bytes)
20. Re: [PATCH 2/3] r8169: code clean-up (score: 1): Author: Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 12:04:23 -0600; Not 100% sure it is a kmail problem (as it could be my IMAP server). I'll trying a different mail clent, and see if that makes any difference. Thanks for the heads-up. Actually, I removed it and it c; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01715.html (17,171 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]