Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v3] igbvf: add new driver to support 82576 virtual functions

From: Roland Dreier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 20:21:08 -0700

> > Since the issue isn't the igbvf driver there is no reason for it to
 > > be held up.
 > 
 > I disagree, I think both cases should be fixed.
 > 
 > Just because we do something already never means that it's
 > ok to proliferate the mistake further.

The igbvf driver doesn't proliferate any mistake.  The num_vfs sysfs
attribute that everyone finds so objectionable is in the igb driver, and
if you follow the patchwork URL that was provided, you would see that
you applied the patch adding it back in February.  The only thing the
igbvf driver does relating to this is bind to the PCI ID of the virtual
functions created by the igb driver.

 - R.