Re: [PATCH 2.6.16-rc4] e1000: revert to single descriptor for legacy receive path

2006-02-28 Thread Jeff Garzik
Jesse Brandeburg wrote: I don't understand, at all. I used stg export (git) to generate the patch and read the patch into mail with pine, just like i've done before. What was line 14? Don't spend any time debugging it. I think I just won't be using pine any more to send patches. Pine defi

Re: [PATCH 2.6.16-rc4] e1000: revert to single descriptor for legacy receive path

2006-02-28 Thread Jesse Brandeburg
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: Jesse Brandeburg wrote: > A recent patch attempted to enable more efficient memory usage by using > only 2kB descriptors for jumbo frames.  The method used to implement > this has since been commented upon as "illegal" and in recent kernels > even causes a

Re: [PATCH 2.6.16-rc4] e1000: revert to single descriptor for legacy receive path

2006-02-28 Thread Jeff Garzik
Jesse Brandeburg wrote: A recent patch attempted to enable more efficient memory usage by using only 2kB descriptors for jumbo frames. The method used to implement this has since been commented upon as "illegal" and in recent kernels even causes a BUG when receiving ip fragments while using ju

[PATCH 2.6.16-rc4] e1000: revert to single descriptor for legacy receive path

2006-02-23 Thread Jesse Brandeburg
A recent patch attempted to enable more efficient memory usage by using only 2kB descriptors for jumbo frames. The method used to implement this has since been commented upon as "illegal" and in recent kernels even causes a BUG when receiving ip fragments while using jumbo frames. This patch s