Andrew Grover wrote:
On 7/8/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* e1000 gets feedback
* Intel disappears for months
* Intel reappears with e1000 rewrite
* you ask them for another complete (simpler) rewrite
* Intel fights tooth and nail when the driver is not accepted verboten
I don't think it must be as-is (i.e. replacing e1000 for all HW) but
don't throw away all the work they've done in architecting the driver
to cleanly handle multiple chip generations.
How about:
1) Considering e1000new's current design, but for ICH9 only
2) test test test
3) Sometime in the future, considering incrementally moving previous
PCIe generations' support from e1000 to e1000new (like I initially
wanted, since that at least means there would be some technical reason
for where the split occurs :-)
That plan would be fine... as long as the e1000new driver internals
were restructured as I've been describing.
If one arrives at a driver containing an internal API that is flexible
enough to implement support for almost -any- NIC, then that's a sign
that it needs to be organized in a different fashion.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
