| 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> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Tulip RaQ2 64 Bit Fix, Jeff Garzik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Tulip RaQ2 64 Bit Fix, Andrew Morton |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Tulip RaQ2 64 Bit Fix, Jeff Garzik |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Tulip RaQ2 64 Bit Fix, Andrew Morton |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |