linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Tulip RaQ2 64 Bit Fix

To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: Tulip RaQ2 64 Bit Fix
From: Grant Grundler <grundler@parisc-linux.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:35:15 -0700
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, grundler@parisc-linux.org
In-reply-to: <43CC4A37.9050502@pobox.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <4393CD9F.3090305@jg555.com> <20051205114456.GA2728@linux-mips.org> <20060116160355.GB28383@deprecation.cyrius.com> <43CBC97E.3090800@jg555.com> <20060116165825.GG5798@deprecation.cyrius.com> <20060116172320.1e6d3cfd.akpm@osdl.org> <43CC4A37.9050502@pobox.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 08:36:55PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >Jeff, can you please suggest how this patch should be altered to make it
> >acceptable?
> 
> Answer hasn't changed since this was last discussed:  sleep, rather than 
> delay for an extra-long time.  That's the only hurdle for the tulip 
> patches you keep resending.
> 
> Francois Romieu even had an untested patch that attempted this, somewhere.

Yes, he implemented a workqueue to invoke tulip_select_media().
        http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/5/21/69

His patch didn't deal with the same issue in tulip_restart_rxtx()
as noted here:
        http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/5/22/6

Otherwise, it was mostly ok - just some other nits.
Last reply on that thread was Oct 2005: "an updated version is cooking".

hth,
grant

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>