From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [v2,net-next,1/3] net: stmmac: enable multiple buffers Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 10:17:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20170324.101734.2195203757001166516.davem@davemloft.net> References: <748685e5-86f8-5f6b-66db-04ec96af4bd6@synopsys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: clabbe.montjoie@gmail.com, thierry.reding@gmail.com, peppe.cavallaro@st.com, alexandre.torgue@st.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:41560 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966906AbdCXRRg (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Mar 2017 13:17:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <748685e5-86f8-5f6b-66db-04ec96af4bd6@synopsys.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Joao Pinto Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 15:02:27 +0000 > Yes, I agree, it is better to revert and leave the tree functional for all. > > @David Miller: > The multiple-buffer patch introduced some problems in some setups that are being > hard to debug, so Corentin gave the idea of reverting the until > commit 7bac4e1ec3ca2342929a39638d615c6b672c27a0 (net: stmmac: stmmac interrupt > treatment prepared for multiple queues), which I fully agree. > > In my setup is ok, but the idea is to have everyone's setup working :), so lets > break them into smaller pieces, and let's only apply them when everyone confirms > that is working ok in your setups, agree? > > What is the typical mechanism for this? I send a patch reverting them? If you can compose a single "git revert" command to achieve this, just tell me what it is and I'll do it. Otherwise send a patch that does the revert. Thanks.