On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 08:36:55PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >Jeff, can you please suggest how this patch should be altered to make it > >acceptable? > > Answer hasn't changed since this was last discussed: sleep, rather than > delay for an extra-long time. That's the only hurdle for the tulip > patches you keep resending. > > Francois Romieu even had an untested patch that attempted this, somewhere. Yes, he implemented a workqueue to invoke tulip_select_media(). http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/5/21/69 His patch didn't deal with the same issue in tulip_restart_rxtx() as noted here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/5/22/6 Otherwise, it was mostly ok - just some other nits. Last reply on that thread was Oct 2005: "an updated version is cooking". hth, grant
