From: Florian Fainelli <florian@openwrt.org>
To: "Michael Büsch" <mb@bu3sch.de>
Cc: Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@gmail.com>,
linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Merging SSB and HND/AI support
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 12:20:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201101171220.52292.florian@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1295261783.24530.3.camel@maggie>
On Monday 17 January 2011 11:56:23 Michael Büsch wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 11:46 +0100, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am currently looking into adding support for the newer Broadcom
> > BCM47xx/53xx SoCs. They require having HND/AI support, which probably
> > means merging the current SSB code and the HND/AI code from the
> > brcm80211 driver. Is anyone already working on this?
> >
> > As far as I can see, there are two possibilities:
> >
> > a) Merge the HND/AI code into the current SSB code, or
> >
> > b) add the missing code for SoCs to brcm80211 and replace the SSB code
> > with it.
>
> Why can't we keep those two platforms separated?
That is also what I am wondering about. Considering that previous BCM47xx
platforms use a MIPS4k core and newer one use MIPS74k or later, you would not
be able to build a single kernel for both which takes advantages of compile-
time optimizations targetting MIPS74k. If this ist not a big concern, then
let's target a single kernel.
> Is there really a lot of shared code between SSB and HND/AI?
>
> It's true that there's currently a lot of device functionality built
> into ssb. Like pci bridge, mips core, extif, etc...
> If you take all that code out, you're probably not left with anything.
>
> So why do we need to replace or merge SSB in the first place? Can't
> it co-exist with HND/AI?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Florian Fainelli <florian-p3rKhJxN3npAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>
To: "Michael Büsch" <mb-fseUSCV1ubazQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Jonas Gorski
<jonas.gorski-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
linux-mips-6z/3iImG2C8G8FEW9MqTrA@public.gmane.org,
linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: Merging SSB and HND/AI support
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 12:20:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201101171220.52292.florian@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1295261783.24530.3.camel@maggie>
On Monday 17 January 2011 11:56:23 Michael Büsch wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 11:46 +0100, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am currently looking into adding support for the newer Broadcom
> > BCM47xx/53xx SoCs. They require having HND/AI support, which probably
> > means merging the current SSB code and the HND/AI code from the
> > brcm80211 driver. Is anyone already working on this?
> >
> > As far as I can see, there are two possibilities:
> >
> > a) Merge the HND/AI code into the current SSB code, or
> >
> > b) add the missing code for SoCs to brcm80211 and replace the SSB code
> > with it.
>
> Why can't we keep those two platforms separated?
That is also what I am wondering about. Considering that previous BCM47xx
platforms use a MIPS4k core and newer one use MIPS74k or later, you would not
be able to build a single kernel for both which takes advantages of compile-
time optimizations targetting MIPS74k. If this ist not a big concern, then
let's target a single kernel.
> Is there really a lot of shared code between SSB and HND/AI?
>
> It's true that there's currently a lot of device functionality built
> into ssb. Like pci bridge, mips core, extif, etc...
> If you take all that code out, you're probably not left with anything.
>
> So why do we need to replace or merge SSB in the first place? Can't
> it co-exist with HND/AI?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-17 11:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-17 10:46 Merging SSB and HND/AI support Jonas Gorski
2011-01-17 10:56 ` Michael Büsch
2011-01-17 10:56 ` Michael Büsch
2011-01-17 11:13 ` Johannes Berg
2011-01-17 11:13 ` Johannes Berg
2011-01-17 11:17 ` Michael Büsch
2011-01-17 11:20 ` Florian Fainelli [this message]
2011-01-17 11:20 ` Florian Fainelli
2011-01-17 12:00 ` Michael Büsch
2011-01-17 12:00 ` Michael Büsch
2011-01-17 11:21 ` Jonas Gorski
2011-01-17 11:21 ` Jonas Gorski
2011-01-17 11:57 ` Michael Büsch
2011-01-17 11:57 ` Michael Büsch
2011-01-17 13:43 ` Jonas Gorski
2011-01-17 13:54 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-01-17 13:54 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-01-17 14:01 ` Jonas Gorski
2011-01-17 14:01 ` Jonas Gorski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201101171220.52292.florian@openwrt.org \
--to=florian@openwrt.org \
--cc=jonas.gorski@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.