On 29 May 2014 21:20:52 CEST, David Miller wrote:
>From: Bjørn Mork
>Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 11:59:07 +0200
>
>> I see that this series is now marked "Not Applicable" in patchwork.
>But
>> the reason is not obvious to me. May I ask why?
>
>I meant to mark it as "Changes Requested",
Yes, that I
From: Bjørn Mork
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 11:59:07 +0200
> I see that this series is now marked "Not Applicable" in patchwork. But
> the reason is not obvious to me. May I ask why?
I meant to mark it as "Changes Requested", because patch 8 had some feedback
that you said you'd address.
--
To unsu
Bjørn Mork writes:
> After considering the comments received after the ethtool coalesce
> support was commited, I have ended up concluding that we should
> remove it again, while we can, before it hits a release. The idea
> was not well enough thought through, and all comments received
> pointed
After considering the comments received after the ethtool coalesce
support was commited, I have ended up concluding that we should
remove it again, while we can, before it hits a release. The idea
was not well enough thought through, and all comments received
pointed to advantages of using a sysfs
