On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 20:52:50 -0400 Jeff Garzik wrote:
| Ravinandan Arakali wrote:
| > Jeff,
| > We tried it out with 2.6.7. Can you pls specify the kernel version
| > on which you tried and we will send a patch which works for that version.
| > We will also send a more detailed description of the changes along with
| > that.
For splitting it up :), e.g.:
- 1 patch could be for renaming only, no code/logic changes
(like TxCfg to tx_cfg); maybe including comments/whitespace changes;
- 1 could be to eliminate (most/all) typedefs
- 1 could be for errata/workarounds
- 1 could be for ethtool support (changes)
- 1 for NAPI support (changes)
- 1 for 2BUFF mode
etc...
Q1: why is this change needed?
static inline u64 readq(void *addr)
{
u64 ret = 0;
ret = readl(addr + 4);
- ret <<= 32;
- ret |= readl(addr);
+ (u64) ret <<= 32;
+ (u64) ret |= readl(addr);
|
| Always diff against the latest version of the kernel. You can find out
| the latest version by going to http://www.kernel.org/ You'll typically
| want the latest snapshot (preferably), or the latest pre-patch.
|
| Standard patch submission format is described at
| http://linux.yyz.us/patch-format.html and in
| Documentation/SubmittingPatches.
|
| When submitting a series of patches, it is normal patches to depend on
| preceding patches.
--
~Randy
|