[..] > I'm looking into this and while the code fix is correct, I'm not sure the > underlying code is correct. > > Unfortunately, the person who knows the most about this is out for spring > break. Can we hold off on this patch?
Yes, the intended fix is good. In addition though, I think igb_enable_mas() should be changed to void and the call to it also modified, since there's no way to fail the enable. A previous implementation had a way to fail, but the current does not. Thanks, Carolyn ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ _______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
