Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755991AbYFRVcy (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:32:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754080AbYFRVcm (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:32:42 -0400 Received: from vms046pub.verizon.net ([206.46.252.46]:41480 "EHLO vms046pub.verizon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754540AbYFRVcl (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:32:41 -0400 Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:25:28 -0700 From: "Kok, Auke" Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] [TCP]: TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT causes leak sockets In-reply-to: <20080618200805.GA18756@elte.hu> To: Ingo Molnar Cc: David Miller , vgusev@openvz.org, e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rjw@sisk.pl, mcmanus@ducksong.com, ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, xemul@openvz.org, Linus Torvalds , Jeff Garzik , Arjan van de Ven Message-id: <48597D48.5090604@intel.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: <20080617083220.GA11393@elte.hu> <20080617.020840.169830916.davem@davemloft.net> <20080617092706.GB20621@elte.hu> <20080617.022909.173003136.davem@davemloft.net> <20080617093929.GA10334@elte.hu> <48595910.8000905@intel.com> <20080618200805.GA18756@elte.hu> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080417) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3421 Lines: 70 Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Kok, Auke wrote: > >>> Any ideas about what i should try next? >> have you tried e1000e? > > will try it. > > But even it if solves the problem it's a nasty complication: given how > many times i have to bisect back into the times when there was only > e1000 around, how do i handle the transition? I have automated bisection > tools, etc. and i bisect very frequently. > > It's a real practical problem for me: if i have E1000E=y in my .config > and go back to an older kernel, i lose that .config setting in 'make > oldconfig'. Then when the bisection run happens to go back into the > E1000E times, 'make oldconfig' picks up E1000E with a default-off > setting - and things break or work differently. > > no other Linux driver i'm using forces me to do that and i rely on many > of them and i rely on proper 'make oldconfig' behavior on a daily basis. > Until now i was able to do automatic bisection back for _years_, to the > v2.6.19 times. You broke that. > > And that's just one driver out of thousands of Linux drivers. Imagine > what happened to bisectability and migration quality if every driver > version update was this careless about its installed base as > e1000/e1000e. > > The e1000 -> e1000e migration it was not only done in an incompetent, > amateurish way, you also ignored real feedback and that combined > together is totally lame and inacceptable behavior in my book. You > should not expect praise and roses from me as long as you do stupid > things like that. where were you when we discussed this? We took over a year and a half to get to a final plan and many people responded and provided feedback. In the end Jeff Garzik and many community members suggested a plan and this is what I implemented. In not a single way did I force anything down anyones throat. I did exactly what the community wanted me to do, and in the way that it seemed best by everyone. You only complain and do not provide a single solution to your problem. Your continued screaming and whining is totally not productive nor constructive at all, and frankly is insulting since you completely ignore the fact that we worked with the the community more than two-year to come to some maintainable situation. All you do is complain. Direct your problems to the network stack and driver maintainers since they approved and worked with me to implement the changes. *** NOTE: I NO LONGER MAINTAIN E1000/E1000E, nor do I represent them or speak for them. *** I frankly suggested that you try e1000e because this might provide valuable information for the people who are taking this ingrateful job after me. This was meant in a productive and constructive way. your flame is totally inappropriate and unprofessional. Either come up with a solution or start working on one, like I did when I took the much hated job as e1000 maintainer. I am totally open to suggestions and if needed I will work with the current e1000/e1000e maintainers on working something out if I see a better solution than the current situation. Until I see such a thing I can't do much else than ignore your childish whining. Auke -- 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/