Re: [CFT] dmfe.c network driver update for 2.4

From: Tobias Ringstrom (tori@tellus.mine.nu)
Date: Sat Nov 18 2000 - 19:05:26 EST


On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Frank Davis wrote:
>
> I would rather fix those non-SMP compliant drivers to be SMP compliant,
> then keeping them 'broken'. Adding the print statements would only be a
> temporary solution.

Of course. This list of priorites is very natural, I think:

1. Working SMP driver
2. Broken SMP driver with a warning.
3. Broken SMP driver without a warning. (Even if "everyone" knows it
   is broken)

It takes less than a minute to add such a warning, but it can take days
or weeks to find someone to really fix the driver. That was my point.

/Tobias

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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 23 2000 - 21:00:16 EST