Re: [CFT] dmfe.c network driver update for 2.4

[Tobias Ringstrom]

On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Frank Davis wrote:
> 
> 	I would rather fix those non-SMP compliant drivers to be SMP compliant, 
> then keeping them 'broken'. Adding the print statements would only be a 
> temporary solution.

Of course. This list of priorites is very natural, I think:

1. Working SMP driver
2. Broken SMP driver with a warning.
3. Broken SMP driver without a warning. (Even if "everyone" knows it
   is broken)

It takes less than a minute to add such a warning, but it can take days
or weeks to find someone to really fix the driver. That was my point.

/Tobias