From: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>
To: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@googlemail.com>
Cc: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] iwl4965: report A-MPDU status
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:13:43 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130130201343.GH2167@tuxdriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201301302058.13586.chunkeey@googlemail.com>
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 08:58:13PM +0100, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 08:07:04 PM John W. Linville wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:08:58AM +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:47:19PM +0100, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> > > > This patch is based on "iwlwifi: report A-MPDU status".
> > > > (12bf6f45d1703858)
> > > >
> > > > Since the firmware will give us an A-MPDU bit and
> > > > only a single PHY information packet for all the
> > > > subframes in an A-MPDU, we can easily report the
> > > > minimal A-MPDU information for radiotap.
> > > >
> > > > Cc: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@googlemail.com>
> > >
> > > ACK
> >
> > OK, I'm confused...
> Ah yes, maybe I can explain it.
>
> > this ACK is for the patch posted on 18 Jan as
> > "[PATCH 2/2] iwl4965: report A-MPDU status".
> > But on the next day (19 Jan) there was a patch
> > posted as "[RFC ] iwl4965: report A-MPDU
> > status" that seems to be different. What a I
> > missing?
> Nothing I hope.
>
> The patch "[PATCH 2/2] iwl4965: report A-MPDU status" might have
> the date 2013-01-18, but it was sent on the 26th... A week after
> the RFC.
>
> Note: The RFC is just both patches ("report A-MPDU status" and
> "iwlegacy: fix antenna mask") merged into one. I did that because
> I wanted to point out the issue of the *shared* bit (antenna mask
> vs ampdu indicator). And thankfully, Johannes explained that...
> "the definition in question has always been the same for all
> hardware. I just didn't fix it for 4965 since it was split off
> to iwlegacy already."
>
> Note2: I had to edit the patch "fix antenna mask" a second time,
> that's why it has a newer date.
>
> > Is this the right patch to merge?
> Yes.
Cool, thanks for the explanation!
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-30 20:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-18 22:47 [PATCH 2/2] iwl4965: report A-MPDU status Christian Lamparter
2013-01-28 10:08 ` Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-01-30 19:07 ` John W. Linville
2013-01-30 19:58 ` Christian Lamparter
2013-01-30 20:13 ` John W. Linville [this message]
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=20130130201343.GH2167@tuxdriver.com \
--to=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=chunkeey@googlemail.com \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sgruszka@redhat.com \
/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.