On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 09:59:28PM -0800, Hisashi T Fujinaka wrote:

I'm pretty sure those double reads are there for a reason, so most of
this I'm going to have to check on Monday. We have a long holiday
weekend here in the US.

if the double reads are there for some reason, can you please let me know what that reason might be..

I'm not sure why you're bothering with an old driver like this, but if
you haven't actually tried this on all the hardware it pertains to, I'm
going want to NAK this.

no it has not been tested on hardware.  :(

i am still in the learning process, NAK is also part of learning.

infact there is another part of the code, which, theoretically, will never get executed. but i didnot dare to send that removal patch without testing on the hardware.

thanks
sudip

I should do this from my todd.fujinaka@intel.com account but it's 10PM
on the first day of a long holiday weekend.

On Thu, 27 Nov 2014, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:

quoted

these variables were only being assigned some values, but were never
used.

Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <redacted>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_hw.c   | 142 ++++++++++++--------------

<snip>

quoted

		case SPEED_100:
-				txb2b = false;
			/* maybe add some timeout factor ? */
			break;
		}

-- 
Hisashi T Fujinaka - htodd@twofifty.com
BSEE + BSChem + BAEnglish + MSCS + $2.50 = coffee