From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de (metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de [185.203.201.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60EB220DD50 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2025 10:10:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.203.201.7 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741342227; cv=none; b=mRQvdQpRyI03NDMh8CmGKbt5c1NdYtbzcMCEBXds+2lPJivD5b4ei+CRH0+nAdWwpbRwwpnTpYYPIPuL0KV39TKvljH9bvNB5FFHIn4IxHuBcEyH2OO7mkLFw7eGduDUefVkcun4jolVCYr7mlrswb6v9xLmD0uHM7kZr1/O1UQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741342227; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7Pstve0mAUr7eMVdFG/Tq73GVnmf4PPnRq7UUxm3NgA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=W+IfToMbZ1OPb6A94dKL70tv4JNyISmYGC5G6JOlglTwVKzWIt2M2aVCTKOv2yZMPjyessztEoNXrOvyxbZerO0jnlHEuFMKcBQgFNuzOVmiFSQGVgwv0m1JoLL886vlw/tJsOKG0+RNrDIcnA+VUIrLeJDPdZK7KQe6SsuZnqs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=pengutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pengutronix.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.203.201.7 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=pengutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pengutronix.de Received: from drehscheibe.grey.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:0:c01:1d::a2]) by metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1tqUer-0007ck-Qj; Fri, 07 Mar 2025 11:10:21 +0100 Received: from pty.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:2:b01:1d::c5]) by drehscheibe.grey.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1tqUer-004T8P-1f; Fri, 07 Mar 2025 11:10:21 +0100 Received: from sha by pty.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1tqUer-000SdI-1K; Fri, 07 Mar 2025 11:10:21 +0100 Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 11:10:21 +0100 From: Sascha Hauer To: Francesco Dolcini Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, David Lin , Brian Norris , Johannes Berg , kernel@pengutronix.de, Jeff Chen , tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com, Stefan Roese Subject: Re: Future of mwifiex driver Message-ID: References: <20250306101715.GA19853@francesco-nb> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250306101715.GA19853@francesco-nb> X-Sent-From: Pengutronix Hildesheim X-URL: http://www.pengutronix.de/ X-Accept-Language: de,en X-Accept-Content-Type: text/plain X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2a0a:edc0:0:c01:1d::a2 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: sha@pengutronix.de X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PTX-Original-Recipient: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 11:17:15AM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote: > + Jeff Chen , tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com > + Stefan Roese > > Hello Sascha, > > On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 12:05:26PM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > I am worried about the future of the mwifiex driver. NXP has an ongoing > > effort of forking the driver to support their new chips, but the forked > > driver lacks support for the old chips supported by the current mwifiex > > driver. > > > > Overall this leaves us and our customers using the mwifiex driver in a > > very bad situation. Johannes made clear that he is not going to merge a > > driver that is 70% identical to the existing driver and on the other > > hand the existing driver doesn't get forward due to its odd-fixes state > > and the potential rise of a new driver which would render work on the > > existing driver useless. > > While I agree on the challenging situation, I would not call it "very > bad" ... as you know there are multiple people with stake on this driver > (I added SR in Cc here, that I just discovered has some interested on > this). > > In the short term I think that improving mwifiex driver is going to be > beneficial for everybody, currently this is not going as smooth as we'd > like, as you wrote and as already commented by Brian. > > And the next step would be to figure out how to enable newer Wi-Fi chip > solution from NXP in mainline, we all have our ideas and we are not > moving forward. NXP keeps pushing for a solution that was already > rejected multiple times and so far it was not successful on explaining > why this is the correct way forward. Here I would agree that the > situation is "very bad" at the moment. I have a patch adding iw61x support to the mwifiex driver. Maybe if I send that for inclusion we can get NXP to explain to us what's actually missing in this patch to properly support it. > > > > I think part of the solution should be that we start cleaning up the > > mwifiex driver > > Ack. I would suggest that we focus on this. I can help with some > review/test (as partially done in the past), but I cannot commit to > actively work on much more than that as of now. Ok, I'll continue with my series then and skip the MAC address patch if that's what blocking it. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |