This patch contains the following possible updates:
- let FORCEDETH no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL
- remove the "Reverse Engineered" from the option text:
for the user it's important which hardware the driver supports, not
how it was developed
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
--- linux-2.6.16-rc2-mm1-full/drivers/net/Kconfig.old 2006-02-12 02:23:31.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc2-mm1-full/drivers/net/Kconfig 2006-02-12 02:24:04.000000000 +0100
@@ -1370,10 +1370,10 @@
<file:Documentation/networking/net-modules.txt>. The module will be
called b44.
config FORCEDETH
- tristate "Reverse Engineered nForce Ethernet support (EXPERIMENTAL)"
- depends on NET_PCI && PCI && EXPERIMENTAL
+ tristate "nForce Ethernet support"
+ depends on NET_PCI && PCI
help
If you have a network (Ethernet) controller of this type, say Y and
read the Ethernet-HOWTO, available from
<http://www.tldp.org/docs.html#howto>.
On Sun, 2006-02-12 at 18:52 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> This patch contains the following possible updates:
> - let FORCEDETH no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL
> - remove the "Reverse Engineered" from the option text:
> for the user it's important which hardware the driver supports, not
> how it was developed
Is this driver as stable as one that was developed with proper
documentation? I prefer to know that something as elementary as a fast
ethernet controller had to be reverse engineered so I can avoid
supporting a vendor so hostile to Linux.
Lee
On Sunday 12 February 2006 22:03, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-12 at 18:52 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > This patch contains the following possible updates:
> > - let FORCEDETH no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL
> > - remove the "Reverse Engineered" from the option text:
> > for the user it's important which hardware the driver supports, not
> > how it was developed
>
> Is this driver as stable as one that was developed with proper
> documentation? I prefer to know that something as elementary as a fast
> ethernet controller had to be reverse engineered so I can avoid
> supporting a vendor so hostile to Linux.
Although NVIDIA continue to maintain their own driver, I know forcedeth has
had contributions from at least a couple of NVIDIA employees. Also, I've
personally used the driver on nForce2, nForce3 and now nForce4 SLI boards and
it's rock solid.
Adrian's change is a good one, IMO.
--
Cheers,
Alistair.
'No sense being pessimistic, it probably wouldn't work anyway.'
Third year Computer Science undergraduate.
1F2 55 South Clerk Street, Edinburgh, UK.
On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 05:03:36PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-12 at 18:52 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > This patch contains the following possible updates:
> > - let FORCEDETH no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL
> > - remove the "Reverse Engineered" from the option text:
> > for the user it's important which hardware the driver supports, not
> > how it was developed
>
> Is this driver as stable as one that was developed with proper
> documentation?
Been using it on nForce since v0.19 (circa 2003) with no problems.
I doubt there are that many (significant) users of the binary driver
left..
And like Alistair pointed out:
drivers/net/forcedeth:17: * Copyright (c) 2004 NVIDIA Corporation
> I prefer to know that something as elementary as a fast ethernet
> controller had to be reverse engineered so I can avoid supporting
> a vendor so hostile to Linux.
Then how about moving the "Reverse Engineered" to the help text instead?