On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:14:03 -0600
Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 07/25/2012 02:44 PM, Greg Rose wrote:
> > Chris Friesen wrote:
> >
> >> Just noticed something suspicious in ixgbe_ndo_set_vf_mac().
> >>
> >> We set adapter->vfinfo[vf].pf_set_mac twice, once unconditionally
> >> and then once conditi
On 07/25/2012 02:44 PM, Greg Rose wrote:
> Chris Friesen wrote:
>
>> Just noticed something suspicious in ixgbe_ndo_set_vf_mac().
>>
>> We set adapter->vfinfo[vf].pf_set_mac twice, once unconditionally and
>> then once conditionally. Should that first one be deleted?
> The first MAC address you se
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:50:20 -0600
Chris Friesen wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Just noticed something suspicious in ixgbe_ndo_set_vf_mac().
>
> We set adapter->vfinfo[vf].pf_set_mac twice, once unconditionally and
> then once conditionally. Should that first one be deleted?
>
The first MAC address you
In the original code
...
if ((adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i210)
|| (adapter->hw.mac.type == e1000_i210)) {
...
the second check of 'adapter->hw.mac.type' is pointless since it tests
for the exact same value as the first.
After reading through a few other parts of the driv
Even when they go beyond 80 characters, user visible strings should be
on one line to make them easy to grep for.
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl
---
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c | 23 +++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
This patch was generated
-Original Message-
From: Jesper Juhl [mailto:j...@chaosbits.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 12:06 PM
To: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wyborny,
Carolyn; Pieper, Jeffrey E; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; Rick Jones; Ronciak, John;
B
Hi,
Just noticed something suspicious in ixgbe_ndo_set_vf_mac().
We set adapter->vfinfo[vf].pf_set_mac twice, once unconditionally and then once
conditionally.
Should that first one be deleted?
int ixgbe_ndo_set_vf_mac(struct net_device *netdev, int vf, u8 *mac)
{
s32 retval = 0;
On 07/23/2012 12:41 AM, Pekka Riikonen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In our 64 byte packet test with 12 10GbE ports we encountered some
> interesting softlockups and interrupt rates. For some reason suddenly we
> started seeing softlockups usually in kworker (doing various work) while
> processing packets.
Problemas para visualizar a mensagem? Acesse aqui
Clique para não receber nossos emails
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclus
