[lkml]   [2000]   [Nov]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [CFT] dmfe.c network driver update for 2.4
Tobias Ringstrom wrote:
> 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.

Marking them with a #warning is fine with me.

Jeff Garzik |
Building 1024 | The chief enemy of creativity is "good" sense
MandrakeSoft | -- Picasso
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:47    [W:0.045 / U:13.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site