| To: | scott.feldman@xxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | e1000 typo? |
| From: | "Jason Lunz" <lunz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 30 Jul 2003 13:21:10 -0400 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.3.28i |
The diff between the 5.1.11 and the newest e1000 drivers has this hunk:
@@ -1999,7 +1996,7 @@
}
#else
for(i = 0; i < E1000_MAX_INTR; i++)
- if(!e1000_clean_rx_irq(adapter) &&
+ if(!e1000_clean_rx_irq(adapter) &
!e1000_clean_tx_irq(adapter))
break;
#endif
is that intentional? I don't think it changes the code behavior, but it
doesn't look right.
--
Jason Lunz Reflex Security
lunz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.reflexsecurity.com/
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [PATCH 5/5] [bonding] backport 2.6 changes to 2.4, Amir Noam |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: e1000 typo?, Feldman, Scott |
| Previous by Thread: | [PATCH 5/5] [bonding] backport 2.6 changes to 2.4, Amir Noam |
| Next by Thread: | RE: e1000 typo?, Feldman, Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |