Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161240AbWASHmH (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2006 02:42:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161253AbWASHmH (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2006 02:42:07 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:32986 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161240AbWASHmG (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2006 02:42:06 -0500 Subject: Re: My vote against eepro* removal From: Arjan van de Ven To: kus Kusche Klaus Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 08:42:03 +0100 Message-Id: <1137656523.2993.17.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 865 Lines: 18 On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 08:19 +0100, kus Kusche Klaus wrote: > Last time I tested (around 2.6.12), eepro100 worked much better > in -rt kernels w.r.t. latencies than e100: no offence but this is EXACTLY the reason why having 2 drivers for the same hardware is bad. People (in general) will switch to the 2nd driver if they hit some thing that is suboptimal, rather than reporting or even fixing it. The result of that is that you end up with 2 drivers, each serving a portion of the users but both suboptimal in non-overlapping ways. Having one driver that's good enough for both groups is clearly superior to that.... - 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/