Re: [PATCH] net/ibm/emac: bump version numbers for correct work with ethtool

2015-09-25 Thread Ivan Mikhaylov 
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 22:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
"David Miller"  wrote:

> From: Ivan Mikhaylov 
> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:07:52 +0400
> 
> > Ben proposed one, is it eligible?
> > Need I resubmit patch with sign and detailed description?
> 
> If I genuinely need to answer that question, maybe you should sit back
> for a little while and think about it yourself, ok?

Sorry, for those stupid questions.

David, Ben, thanks for the help.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] net/ibm/emac: bump version numbers for correct work with ethtool

2015-09-25 Thread Ivan Mikhaylov 
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 22:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
"David Miller"  wrote:

> From: Ivan Mikhaylov 
> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:07:52 +0400
> 
> > Ben proposed one, is it eligible?
> > Need I resubmit patch with sign and detailed description?
> 
> If I genuinely need to answer that question, maybe you should sit back
> for a little while and think about it yourself, ok?

Sorry, for those stupid questions.

David, Ben, thanks for the help.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] net/ibm/emac: bump version numbers for correct work with ethtool

2015-09-24 Thread David Miller 
From: Ivan Mikhaylov 
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:07:52 +0400

> Ben proposed one, is it eligible?
> Need I resubmit patch with sign and detailed description?

If I genuinely need to answer that question, maybe you should sit back
for a little while and think about it yourself, ok?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] net/ibm/emac: bump version numbers for correct work with ethtool

2015-09-24 Thread Ivan Mikhaylov 
On Wed, 23 Sep 2015 11:05:49 -0700 (PDT)
"David Miller"  wrote:

> From: Ivan Mikhaylov 
> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 14:42:22 +0400
> 
> > Register dump out work preventing with 
> > old ethtool + new driver and new ethtool + old driver.
> 
> First of all you didn't provide a proper Signoff.
> 
> Second of all, there was so much discussion about whether this does
> or does not break things for various combinations of old/new ethtool
> and kernel.
> 
> Therefore I want a real detailed commit message that explains why this
> is all OK.  After so much confusion and discussion, providing a patch
> with absolutely no commit message is completely inappropriate.

David, my apologies for signoff and description, I admit that is inappropriate.
Ben proposed one, is it eligible?
Need I resubmit patch with sign and detailed description?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] net/ibm/emac: bump version numbers for correct work with ethtool

2015-09-24 Thread David Miller 
From: Ivan Mikhaylov 
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:07:52 +0400

> Ben proposed one, is it eligible?
> Need I resubmit patch with sign and detailed description?

If I genuinely need to answer that question, maybe you should sit back
for a little while and think about it yourself, ok?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] net/ibm/emac: bump version numbers for correct work with ethtool

2015-09-24 Thread Ivan Mikhaylov 
On Wed, 23 Sep 2015 11:05:49 -0700 (PDT)
"David Miller"  wrote:

> From: Ivan Mikhaylov 
> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 14:42:22 +0400
> 
> > Register dump out work preventing with 
> > old ethtool + new driver and new ethtool + old driver.
> 
> First of all you didn't provide a proper Signoff.
> 
> Second of all, there was so much discussion about whether this does
> or does not break things for various combinations of old/new ethtool
> and kernel.
> 
> Therefore I want a real detailed commit message that explains why this
> is all OK.  After so much confusion and discussion, providing a patch
> with absolutely no commit message is completely inappropriate.

David, my apologies for signoff and description, I admit that is inappropriate.
Ben proposed one, is it eligible?
Need I resubmit patch with sign and detailed description?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] net/ibm/emac: bump version numbers for correct work with ethtool

2015-09-23 Thread Ben Hutchings 
On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 11:05 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ivan Mikhaylov 
> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 14:42:22 +0400
> 
> > Register dump out work preventing with 
> > old ethtool + new driver and new ethtool + old driver.
> 
> First of all you didn't provide a proper Signoff.
> 
> Second of all, there was so much discussion about whether this does
> or does not break things for various combinations of old/new ethtool
> and kernel.
> 
> Therefore I want a real detailed commit message that explains why this
> is all OK.  After so much confusion and discussion, providing a patch
> with absolutely no commit message is completely inappropriate.

I would suggest something like this:

"""
The size of the MAC register dump used to be the size specified by the
reg property in the device tree.  Userland has no good way of finding
out that size, and it was not specified consistently for each MAC type,
so ethtool would end up printing junk at the end of the register dump
if the device tree didn't match the size it assumed.

Using the new version numbers indicates unambiguously that the size of
the MAC register dump is dependent only on the MAC type.

Fixes: 5369c71f7ca2 ("net/ibm/emac: fix size of emac dump memory areas")
"""

Also:

Acked-by: Ben Hutchings 

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Teamwork is essential - it allows you to blame someone else.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [PATCH] net/ibm/emac: bump version numbers for correct work with ethtool

2015-09-23 Thread David Miller 
From: Ivan Mikhaylov 
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 14:42:22 +0400

> Register dump out work preventing with 
> old ethtool + new driver and new ethtool + old driver.

First of all you didn't provide a proper Signoff.

Second of all, there was so much discussion about whether this does
or does not break things for various combinations of old/new ethtool
and kernel.

Therefore I want a real detailed commit message that explains why this
is all OK.  After so much confusion and discussion, providing a patch
with absolutely no commit message is completely inappropriate.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] net/ibm/emac: bump version numbers for correct work with ethtool

2015-09-23 Thread Ben Hutchings 
On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 11:05 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ivan Mikhaylov 
> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 14:42:22 +0400
> 
> > Register dump out work preventing with 
> > old ethtool + new driver and new ethtool + old driver.
> 
> First of all you didn't provide a proper Signoff.
> 
> Second of all, there was so much discussion about whether this does
> or does not break things for various combinations of old/new ethtool
> and kernel.
> 
> Therefore I want a real detailed commit message that explains why this
> is all OK.  After so much confusion and discussion, providing a patch
> with absolutely no commit message is completely inappropriate.

I would suggest something like this:

"""
The size of the MAC register dump used to be the size specified by the
reg property in the device tree.  Userland has no good way of finding
out that size, and it was not specified consistently for each MAC type,
so ethtool would end up printing junk at the end of the register dump
if the device tree didn't match the size it assumed.

Using the new version numbers indicates unambiguously that the size of
the MAC register dump is dependent only on the MAC type.

Fixes: 5369c71f7ca2 ("net/ibm/emac: fix size of emac dump memory areas")
"""

Also:

Acked-by: Ben Hutchings 

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Teamwork is essential - it allows you to blame someone else.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [PATCH] net/ibm/emac: bump version numbers for correct work with ethtool

2015-09-23 Thread David Miller 
From: Ivan Mikhaylov 
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 14:42:22 +0400

> Register dump out work preventing with 
> old ethtool + new driver and new ethtool + old driver.

First of all you didn't provide a proper Signoff.

Second of all, there was so much discussion about whether this does
or does not break things for various combinations of old/new ethtool
and kernel.

Therefore I want a real detailed commit message that explains why this
is all OK.  After so much confusion and discussion, providing a patch
with absolutely no commit message is completely inappropriate.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/