From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.87 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1cfEt4-0002T0-TM for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 18 Feb 2017 23:58:01 +0000 From: "Valo, Kalle" Subject: Re: [RFC v3 0/8] ath10k sdio support Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2017 23:57:10 +0000 Message-ID: <877f4ngii5.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> References: <1484342771-6160-1-git-send-email-erik.stromdahl@gmail.com> <87fujbhb29.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <1c87e0d1-1f14-08bb-2a69-650788fba8dc@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1c87e0d1-1f14-08bb-2a69-650788fba8dc@gmail.com> (Erik Stromdahl's message of "Sat, 18 Feb 2017 23:05:03 +0100") Content-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Erik Stromdahl Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" Erik Stromdahl writes: > I was actually about to email you about this. > > I have made a few more updates to the sdio code so I think it would be > best if I could submit a new series of patches based on this code (v4). > > Then you can tweak it (v5). > > It is only minor updates to the HIF layer (added QCA9377 support) and > a setup of some pll registers. Ok, that sounds good. I'll wait for v4. > btw, should I still mark them as RFC or should it be PATCH this time? > > If I go for PATCH, should the version be v4 or should I start from v1? v4 would be fine. Thanks. -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:22890 "EHLO wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750905AbdBRX5i (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Feb 2017 18:57:38 -0500 From: "Valo, Kalle" To: Erik Stromdahl CC: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [RFC v3 0/8] ath10k sdio support Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2017 23:57:10 +0000 Message-ID: <877f4ngii5.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (sfid-20170219_005741_725208_BB1C7FF3) References: <1484342771-6160-1-git-send-email-erik.stromdahl@gmail.com> <87fujbhb29.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <1c87e0d1-1f14-08bb-2a69-650788fba8dc@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1c87e0d1-1f14-08bb-2a69-650788fba8dc@gmail.com> (Erik Stromdahl's message of "Sat, 18 Feb 2017 23:05:03 +0100") Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Erik Stromdahl writes: > I was actually about to email you about this. > > I have made a few more updates to the sdio code so I think it would be > best if I could submit a new series of patches based on this code (v4). > > Then you can tweak it (v5). > > It is only minor updates to the HIF layer (added QCA9377 support) and > a setup of some pll registers. Ok, that sounds good. I'll wait for v4. > btw, should I still mark them as RFC or should it be PATCH this time? > > If I go for PATCH, should the version be v4 or should I start from v1? v4 would be fine. Thanks. --=20 Kalle Valo=