On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 03:15:37PM -0800, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> He is referring to a patch to add support for devices which do not use
> the MII interface which use an Intel MAC. I have the patch in my
> local tree and have been keeping it up-to-date. I should have an
> update on this patch after
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 10:09:43PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-12-29 at 09:17 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > - acx100 (ok, that one is a bit mean to add to this list ;)
> >
> > What's that?
> >
> > Just resend everything, please, fulyl changelogged, with all necessary
>
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Andrew Morton
wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 11:25:15 +0100 Andreas Mohr wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > Adrian Bunk (1):
>> >
>> > The overdue eepro100 removal.
>>
>> That would be a rather pronounced NAK then? (sorry ;)
>> (reason: rendering my web surfing box usele
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 11:25:15 +0100 Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Adrian Bunk (1):
> >
> > The overdue eepro100 removal.
>
> That would be a rather pronounced NAK then? (sorry ;)
> (reason: rendering my web surfing box useless due to networking loss,
> see thread "[RFC/PATCH] e100 drive
Hi,
> Adrian Bunk (1):
>
> The overdue eepro100 removal.
That would be a rather pronounced NAK then? (sorry ;)
(reason: rendering my web surfing box useless due to networking loss,
see thread "[RFC/PATCH] e100 driver didn't support any MII-less PHYs...")
AFAICS e100 is still "non-MII"-cha
