From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Karl Hiramoto Subject: Re: [Linux-ATM-General] [PATCH] br2684 testing needed for packet loss and performance Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 12:24:39 +0200 Message-ID: <4A9901E7.9040804@hiramoto.org> References: <200908281225.n7SCPUC3031293@cmf.nrl.navy.mil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-atm-general@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: chas3@users.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from caiajhbdccac.dreamhost.com ([208.97.132.202]:42787 "EHLO spunkymail-a12.g.dreamhost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751373AbZH2KYk (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Aug 2009 06:24:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200908281225.n7SCPUC3031293@cmf.nrl.navy.mil> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Chas Williams (CONTRACTOR) wrote: > In message <4A97B3A9.6040103@hiramoto.org>,Karl Hiramoto writes: > >> Anyone care to test or comment on these patches? I've attached >> versions for 2.6.28 and 2.6.30. >> > > this needs to be against the net-2.6 git repository. but the 2.6.30 > would probably apply just fine. Ok i will resend the patch against net-2.6 or should i do net-next-2.6? Do i have to wait for a merge window? > except for the comments, below this > patch looks fine and makes sense. a similar thing had to be done for > the lec.c interface. > > Ok I'll clean up all these issues. -- karl