Lucid pull request, igb: Add full support for 82580 devices

[Andy Whitcroft]

On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 08:22:31AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:

> >Frankly, this just looks to intrusive to be called a bug fix. And it heavily
> >modifies an existing driver. Plus we really have feature freeze now.
> >So NAK from me here for the main kernel. I would much more prefer this to be LBM.
> 
> This is about server enablement, so of course its not a bug fix. I
> realize I'm abusing the freeze policy (I ought to have done this a
> couple of weeks ago). This patch allows us to enable servers using a
> very popular chipset in the window between Lucid release and the
> first Lucid point release (which will have the L+1 backported
> kernel). It only affects one driver, which is now identical (with
> minor syntactic exceptions) to the upstream 2.6.33 driver, making it
> very easy to maintain with respect to upstream stable.
> 
> Obviously I consider gigabit ethernet support pretty important
> (remember sfc?), so I'm willing to take the risk and the
> responsibility.

This is a late, large update, however looking at the stats it does affect
a single driver only so the risk for other hardware is very low.  This is
a server targetted device and so actually a relativly rare item for the
common user, again reducing risk.  A key factor here to my mind is that
these devices are network devices and for server installation netboot
based installs are common.  Putting this into LBM (which would be my
preference) would not help as they cannot boot the image to install LBM.
Overall I have been more tollerant of networking updates in the main
kernel for this reason, sfc as an example.

Overall therefore dispite the size and indeed the very late appearance
I am inclined to accept these changes.

Acked-by: Andy Whitcroft <apw at canonical.com>

> I totally spaced off the '-x' upstream commit when cherry-picking.
> I'll redo the whole mess if you deem it important.

Be nice to get it cleaned up if we are going to pull it in.

-apw