Re: eepro100: wait_for_cmd_done timeout

[Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>]

On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 11:42:00AM +0000, Chris Bacott wrote:
> > Thanks for the suggestion...
> > I got another one, telling me to have a look at the e100 driver,
> > and this raises a question I have for quite a long time : why does
> > the Kernel have two different supports for the same hardware ?
> > Is this a migration plan, a long run "please switch from eepro100
> > to e100" ?
> > Is there a better working one ?
> >
> Becuase, IIRC, eepro100 is the original EtherExpress100 Nic driver written by 
> Becker. the e100 Driver is written initially by Intel, and is a obviously 
> newer. Question is, would you want to use a driver written by the 
> manufacturer of the chip itself, or use a driver that has been in use for 
> MANY years, and has been proven solid.

This statement is utterly ridiculous, considering that the poster is
having problems with the eepro100 driver.  It is obviously, provably
_NOT_ solid.

In Red Hat's experience, some people find eepro100 very stable for
them, some people find e100 very stable for them.  There is no driver
which is 100% stable for all people at all times.

	Jeff