On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 16:30, Auke Kok wrote:
On Wed, 31 May 2006 14:31:05 +0530, Amit K Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Should these DPRINTKs be removed from the 2.6.x e1000 code as well ?
they already are. the patch was merged in 7.0.38-k2 or so which is over a
month ago.
I do not
Amit Arora wrote:
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 16:30, Auke Kok wrote:
On Wed, 31 May 2006 14:31:05 +0530, Amit K Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Should these DPRINTKs be removed from the 2.6.x e1000 code as well ?
they already are. the patch was merged in 7.0.38-k2 or so which is over a month ago.
Auke Kok wrote:
Amit Arora wrote:
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 16:30, Auke Kok wrote:
On Wed, 31 May 2006 14:31:05 +0530, Amit K Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Should these DPRINTKs be removed from the 2.6.x e1000 code as well ?
they already are. the patch was merged in 7.0.38-k2 or so which is
Auke Kok wrote:
I'm in need of coffee - these changes got queued for 2.6.18. They're in
jgarziks netdev-2.6.git, but not anywhere in 2.6.17rcX
Auke
Thanks for the clarification !
Regards,
Amit Arora
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a
Hello,
I am wondering why this patch e1000: Remove PM warning DPRINTKs
breaking 2.4.x kernels
(http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg10803.html) was
meant only for 2.4 kernels, and _not_ for 2.6 kernels.
These DPRINTKs in e1000_suspend() are currently resulting in following
On Wed, 31 May 2006 14:31:05 +0530, Amit K Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I am wondering why this patch e1000: Remove PM warning DPRINTKs
breaking 2.4.x kernels
(http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg10803.html) was
meant only for 2.4 kernels, and _not_ for 2.6
