Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753415Ab3EUIjT (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 May 2013 04:39:19 -0400 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:45628 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753258Ab3EUIjN (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 May 2013 04:39:13 -0400 Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 01:39:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20130521.013912.96249995742935192.davem@davemloft.net> To: or.gerlitz@gmail.com Cc: eilong@broadcom.com, eliezer.tamir@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, donald.c.skidmore@intel.com, e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, willemb@google.com, andi@firstfloor.org, hpa@zytor.com, eliezer@tamir.org.il Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 3/4] ixgbe: Add support for ndo_ll_poll From: David Miller In-Reply-To: References: <1369120003.25971.2.camel@lb-tlvb-eilong.il.broadcom.com> <20130521.001444.1361294042663568537.davem@davemloft.net> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 24.1 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (shards.monkeyblade.net [0.0.0.0]); Tue, 21 May 2013 01:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1330 Lines: 29 From: Or Gerlitz Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 11:24:41 +0300 > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:14 AM, David Miller wrote: >> From: "Eilon Greenstein" >> Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 10:06:43 +0300 >> >>> Hopefully this series will be accepted so we can send follow up support >>> for the bnx2x as well. >> >> I think in two or three more iterations it will be merged. >> >> There are no objections on the fundamentals, it's just implementation >> details and coding style at this point. > > Dave, sorry, I might be a bit behind the rest of the reviewers, but I > just fail to understand nor find any reference that explains the > module param of ixgbe nor it makes sense to me to merge that piece of > the code upstream (its not for staging, correct?), as I wrote here > http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=136908123432072&w=2 basically, I > know you're not a great fun of module params (to say the least) and > surely not something named "allow_unsafe_removal", thoughts? It's one of those "implementation details", I hate it too. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/