From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
Subject: [ath9k-devel] ath9k gpio request
Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2016 17:37:50 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d1nxt3y9.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1464932944074.85131@qti.qualcomm.com> (Miaoqing Pan's message of "Fri, 3 Jun 2016 05:49:06 +0000")
(Fixing top posting)
"Pan, Miaoqing" <miaoqing@qti.qualcomm.com> writes:
>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>> @@ -1122,8 +1122,8 @@ enum {
>>> #define AR9300_NUM_GPIO 16
>>> #define AR9330_NUM_GPIO 16
>>> #define AR9340_NUM_GPIO 23
>>> -#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO 10
>>> -#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO 12
>>> +#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO 14
>>> +#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO 11
>>> #define AR9531_NUM_GPIO 18
>>> #define AR9550_NUM_GPIO 24
>>> #define AR9561_NUM_GPIO 23
>>> @@ -1139,8 +1139,8 @@ enum {
>>> #define AR9300_GPIO_MASK 0x0000F4FF
>>> #define AR9330_GPIO_MASK 0x0000F4FF
>>> #define AR9340_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> -#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK 0x000003FF
>>> -#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK 0x00000FFF
>>> +#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK 0x00003FFF
>>> +#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK 0x000007FF
>>> #define AR9531_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> #define AR9550_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> #define AR9561_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>
>> solves the problem.
>>
>> Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk>
>
> Done, https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9151847/
But the patch 9151847 is different from what Sudip tested above? Why?
And if you modify something _after_ the reporter has tested the patch
clearly document what you changed and why. I do not want find hidden
changes like this, even more so when the patch is going to a 4.7-rc
release.
Sudip, could you also test patch 9151847, please? You can download the
patch from the patchwork link above.
--
Kalle Valo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
To: "Pan, Miaoqing" <miaoqing-Rm6X0d1/PG5y9aJCnZT0Uw@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Sudip Mukherjee
<sudipm.mukherjee-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr-3FnU+UHB4dNDw9hX6IcOSA@public.gmane.org>,
ath9k-devel <ath9k-devel-zC7DfRvBq/JWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-next@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-next-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org"
<ath9k-devel-xDcbHBWguxHbcTqmT+pZeQ@public.gmane.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org"
<netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Miaoqing Pan <miaoqing-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: ath9k gpio request
Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2016 17:37:50 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d1nxt3y9.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1464932944074.85131-Rm6X0d1/PG5y9aJCnZT0Uw@public.gmane.org> (Miaoqing Pan's message of "Fri, 3 Jun 2016 05:49:06 +0000")
(Fixing top posting)
"Pan, Miaoqing" <miaoqing-Rm6X0d1/PG5y9aJCnZT0Uw@public.gmane.org> writes:
>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>> @@ -1122,8 +1122,8 @@ enum {
>>> #define AR9300_NUM_GPIO 16
>>> #define AR9330_NUM_GPIO 16
>>> #define AR9340_NUM_GPIO 23
>>> -#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO 10
>>> -#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO 12
>>> +#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO 14
>>> +#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO 11
>>> #define AR9531_NUM_GPIO 18
>>> #define AR9550_NUM_GPIO 24
>>> #define AR9561_NUM_GPIO 23
>>> @@ -1139,8 +1139,8 @@ enum {
>>> #define AR9300_GPIO_MASK 0x0000F4FF
>>> #define AR9330_GPIO_MASK 0x0000F4FF
>>> #define AR9340_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> -#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK 0x000003FF
>>> -#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK 0x00000FFF
>>> +#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK 0x00003FFF
>>> +#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK 0x000007FF
>>> #define AR9531_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> #define AR9550_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> #define AR9561_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>
>> solves the problem.
>>
>> Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee-4yDnlxn2s6sWdaTGBSpHTA@public.gmane.org>
>
> Done, https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9151847/
But the patch 9151847 is different from what Sudip tested above? Why?
And if you modify something _after_ the reporter has tested the patch
clearly document what you changed and why. I do not want find hidden
changes like this, even more so when the patch is going to a 4.7-rc
release.
Sudip, could you also test patch 9151847, please? You can download the
patch from the patchwork link above.
--
Kalle Valo
--
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
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: "Pan\, Miaoqing" <miaoqing@qti.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
ath9k-devel <ath9k-devel@qualcomm.com>,
"linux-next\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-wireless\@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"ath9k-devel\@lists.ath9k.org" <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>,
"netdev\@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Miaoqing Pan <miaoqing@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: ath9k gpio request
Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2016 17:37:50 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d1nxt3y9.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1464932944074.85131@qti.qualcomm.com> (Miaoqing Pan's message of "Fri, 3 Jun 2016 05:49:06 +0000")
(Fixing top posting)
"Pan, Miaoqing" <miaoqing@qti.qualcomm.com> writes:
>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>> @@ -1122,8 +1122,8 @@ enum {
>>> #define AR9300_NUM_GPIO 16
>>> #define AR9330_NUM_GPIO 16
>>> #define AR9340_NUM_GPIO 23
>>> -#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO 10
>>> -#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO 12
>>> +#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO 14
>>> +#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO 11
>>> #define AR9531_NUM_GPIO 18
>>> #define AR9550_NUM_GPIO 24
>>> #define AR9561_NUM_GPIO 23
>>> @@ -1139,8 +1139,8 @@ enum {
>>> #define AR9300_GPIO_MASK 0x0000F4FF
>>> #define AR9330_GPIO_MASK 0x0000F4FF
>>> #define AR9340_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> -#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK 0x000003FF
>>> -#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK 0x00000FFF
>>> +#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK 0x00003FFF
>>> +#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK 0x000007FF
>>> #define AR9531_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> #define AR9550_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> #define AR9561_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>
>> solves the problem.
>>
>> Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk>
>
> Done, https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9151847/
But the patch 9151847 is different from what Sudip tested above? Why?
And if you modify something _after_ the reporter has tested the patch
clearly document what you changed and why. I do not want find hidden
changes like this, even more so when the patch is going to a 4.7-rc
release.
Sudip, could you also test patch 9151847, please? You can download the
patch from the patchwork link above.
--
Kalle Valo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: "Pan\, Miaoqing" <miaoqing@qti.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
ath9k-devel <ath9k-devel@qualcomm.com>,
"linux-next\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-wireless\@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"ath9k-devel\@lists.ath9k.org" <ath9k-devel@venema.h4ckr.net>,
"netdev\@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Miaoqing Pan <miaoqing@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: ath9k gpio request
Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2016 17:37:50 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d1nxt3y9.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1464932944074.85131@qti.qualcomm.com> (Miaoqing Pan's message of "Fri, 3 Jun 2016 05:49:06 +0000")
(Fixing top posting)
"Pan, Miaoqing" <miaoqing@qti.qualcomm.com> writes:
>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>> @@ -1122,8 +1122,8 @@ enum {
>>> #define AR9300_NUM_GPIO 16
>>> #define AR9330_NUM_GPIO 16
>>> #define AR9340_NUM_GPIO 23
>>> -#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO 10
>>> -#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO 12
>>> +#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO 14
>>> +#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO 11
>>> #define AR9531_NUM_GPIO 18
>>> #define AR9550_NUM_GPIO 24
>>> #define AR9561_NUM_GPIO 23
>>> @@ -1139,8 +1139,8 @@ enum {
>>> #define AR9300_GPIO_MASK 0x0000F4FF
>>> #define AR9330_GPIO_MASK 0x0000F4FF
>>> #define AR9340_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> -#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK 0x000003FF
>>> -#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK 0x00000FFF
>>> +#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK 0x00003FFF
>>> +#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK 0x000007FF
>>> #define AR9531_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> #define AR9550_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> #define AR9561_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>
>> solves the problem.
>>
>> Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk>
>
> Done, https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9151847/
But the patch 9151847 is different from what Sudip tested above? Why?
And if you modify something _after_ the reporter has tested the patch
clearly document what you changed and why. I do not want find hidden
changes like this, even more so when the patch is going to a 4.7-rc
release.
Sudip, could you also test patch 9151847, please? You can download the
patch from the patchwork link above.
--
Kalle Valo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
To: "Pan\, Miaoqing" <miaoqing-Rm6X0d1/PG5y9aJCnZT0Uw@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Sudip Mukherjee
<sudipm.mukherjee-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr-3FnU+UHB4dNDw9hX6IcOSA@public.gmane.org>,
ath9k-devel <ath9k-devel-zC7DfRvBq/JWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-next\@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-next-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-wireless\@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"ath9k-devel\@lists.ath9k.org"
<ath9k-devel-xDcbHBWguxHbcTqmT+pZeQ@public.gmane.org>,
"netdev\@vger.kernel.org"
<netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Miaoqing Pan <miaoqing-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: ath9k gpio request
Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2016 17:37:50 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d1nxt3y9.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1464932944074.85131-Rm6X0d1/PG5y9aJCnZT0Uw@public.gmane.org> (Miaoqing Pan's message of "Fri, 3 Jun 2016 05:49:06 +0000")
(Fixing top posting)
"Pan, Miaoqing" <miaoqing-Rm6X0d1/PG5y9aJCnZT0Uw@public.gmane.org> writes:
>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>> @@ -1122,8 +1122,8 @@ enum {
>>> #define AR9300_NUM_GPIO 16
>>> #define AR9330_NUM_GPIO 16
>>> #define AR9340_NUM_GPIO 23
>>> -#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO 10
>>> -#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO 12
>>> +#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO 14
>>> +#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO 11
>>> #define AR9531_NUM_GPIO 18
>>> #define AR9550_NUM_GPIO 24
>>> #define AR9561_NUM_GPIO 23
>>> @@ -1139,8 +1139,8 @@ enum {
>>> #define AR9300_GPIO_MASK 0x0000F4FF
>>> #define AR9330_GPIO_MASK 0x0000F4FF
>>> #define AR9340_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> -#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK 0x000003FF
>>> -#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK 0x00000FFF
>>> +#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK 0x00003FFF
>>> +#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK 0x000007FF
>>> #define AR9531_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> #define AR9550_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>> #define AR9561_GPIO_MASK 0x0000000F
>>
>> solves the problem.
>>
>> Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee-4yDnlxn2s6sWdaTGBSpHTA@public.gmane.org>
>
> Done, https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9151847/
But the patch 9151847 is different from what Sudip tested above? Why?
And if you modify something _after_ the reporter has tested the patch
clearly document what you changed and why. I do not want find hidden
changes like this, even more so when the patch is going to a 4.7-rc
release.
Sudip, could you also test patch 9151847, please? You can download the
patch from the patchwork link above.
--
Kalle Valo
--
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:[~2016-06-04 14:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-30 3:22 linux-next: Tree for May 30 Stephen Rothwell
2016-05-30 14:04 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-05-30 18:47 ` [ath9k-devel] " Sudip Mukherjee
2016-05-30 14:04 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-05-31 7:31 ` [ath9k-devel] ath9k gpio request Kalle Valo
2016-05-31 7:31 ` Kalle Valo
2016-05-31 7:31 ` Kalle Valo
2016-05-31 7:31 ` Kalle Valo
2016-05-31 7:35 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-05-31 12:22 ` [ath9k-devel] " Sudip Mukherjee
2016-05-31 7:35 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-01 6:54 ` Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-01 7:01 ` [ath9k-devel] " Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-01 6:54 ` Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-01 11:12 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-01 15:43 ` [ath9k-devel] " Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-01 11:12 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-01 12:18 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-01 16:49 ` [ath9k-devel] " Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-01 12:18 ` Sudip Mukherjee
[not found] ` <574ED297.4080004-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2016-06-02 8:02 ` Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-02 8:03 ` [ath9k-devel] " Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-02 8:02 ` Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-02 8:02 ` Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-02 9:01 ` [ath9k-devel] " Janusz Dziedzic
2016-06-02 9:01 ` Janusz Dziedzic
2016-06-02 9:01 ` Janusz Dziedzic
2016-06-02 11:39 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-02 16:09 ` [ath9k-devel] " Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-02 11:39 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-03 5:33 ` [ath9k-devel] " Kalle Valo
2016-06-03 5:33 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-03 5:33 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-03 5:33 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-03 5:49 ` Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-03 5:49 ` [ath9k-devel] " Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-03 5:49 ` Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-04 14:37 ` Kalle Valo [this message]
2016-06-04 14:37 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-04 14:37 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-04 14:37 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-04 14:37 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-05 17:40 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-05 17:52 ` [ath9k-devel] " Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-05 17:40 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-06-07 11:43 ` [ath9k-devel] " Kalle Valo
2016-06-07 11:43 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-07 11:43 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-07 11:43 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-07 11:43 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-06 1:51 ` Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-06 1:51 ` [ath9k-devel] " Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-06 1:51 ` Pan, Miaoqing
2016-06-06 1:51 ` Pan, Miaoqing
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=87d1nxt3y9.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com \
--to=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.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.