Chris Wedgwood wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 01:24:36AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> Sure, and that's planned. Wanna send me a patch for it? :)
>
> Possibly, but I wonder if this is a kernel-space problem or not. Why
> not put all the smarts into userland for it?
I meant, send me a
Donald Becker wrote:
> I was on vacation, and thus didn't have the opportunity to comment earlier.
Thanks a bunch for your comments here.
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> > > - You are proposing some caching for the MII registers. I suppose that you
> > > would like to have this c
Bogdan Costescu wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> - I don't know what the long-term plan is about ethtool vs. MII ioctl's.
> If you do plan to replace completely the MII ioctl's, there should be a
> way to access _all_ MII registers provided by the PHY, even if you do this
> in a
On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Comments appreciated.
Some general comments first, the others are spread through the code.
- I don't know what the long-term plan is about ethtool vs. MII ioctl's.
If you do plan to replace completely the MII ioctl's, there should be a
way to access _al
4 matches
Mail list logo
