It was for full-ll, not for mini-ll.
> patches: drivers/net/3c59x.c
> drivers/net/8139too.c
> drivers/net/eepro100.c
>
> Unfortunately me have neither of those. This would mean I cannot benefit
> from _these_ patches, but instead would need _others_ (like tulip or
> name-one-of-the-rest-of-the-drivers) to see _some_ effect you tell me I
> _should_ see (I currently see _none_). How do you argue then against the
> statement: we need patches for /drivers/net/*.c ?? I do not expect
> 3c59x.c to be particularly bad in comparison to tulip/*.c or lets say
> via-rhine.c, do you?
I also checked the tulip driver (which is the one I use at home) and didn't
find need for "fixing" there. I will definitely take a closer look at that
driver in future.
WLAN drivers seem to need some hacking, but I'm not very interested in that
area. I think WLAN is one big security hole that noone should be using...
- Jussi Laako
-- PGP key fingerprint: 161D 6FED 6A92 39E2 EB5B 39DD A4DE 63EB C216 1E4B Available at PGP keyservers- 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/