Re: [RFC v3 0/8] ath10k sdio support

From: "Valo, Kalle" <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com>
To: Erik Stromdahl <erik.stromdahl@gmail.com>
Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 0/8] ath10k sdio support
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2017 13:40:17 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fujbhb29.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1484342771-6160-1-git-send-email-erik.stromdahl@gmail.com> (Erik Stromdahl's message of "Fri, 13 Jan 2017 22:26:03 +0100")

Hej,

Erik Stromdahl <erik.stromdahl@gmail.com> writes:

> This is the third version of the sdio RFC patch series.
> The actual sdio code (patch 6) has been subject to a massive overhaul,
> mainly as a result of Kalle's review comments.
> It no longer has any strong resemblance of the original ath6kl code from
> which it was originally based upon.
>
> Previous pathes 6 to 10 have been merged into one single patch.
>
> The previous series had a rework of the "HTC fake service" connect
> (ep 0 connect) that introduced a race between the actual endpoint
> connect and the HTC ready message. This issue has been addressed,
> and the current patches (3 and 4) has been rewritten accordingly.
>
> * overview of patches *
>
> Patches 1 to 4 are more or less identical to the previous RFC, with an
> exception for patch 3 that changes the "HTC fake service" connect
> (mentioned above).
>
> Patch 5 is a squashed version of previous patches 6 to 10.
>
> Patch 6 is the actual sdio patch
>
> Patches 7 to 8 are new and adds special sdio versions of BMI get
> target info and HTC ready.
>
> The new version was built and tested against:
> tag: ath-201701121109
>
> Erik Stromdahl (8):
>   ath10k: htc: made static function public
>   ath10k: htc: rx trailer lookahead support
>   ath10k: htc: move htc ctrl ep connect to htc_init
>   ath10k: htc: refactorization
>   ath10k: various sdio related definitions
>   ath10k: sdio support
>   ath10k: sdio get target info
>   ath10k: htc: ready_ext msg support

Sorry for not getting back to you earlier, haven't found time to look
this in detail during the last few weeks.

This is looking quite good now. I have some nitpicks (build warnings,
maybe reorder some patches etc) still but I think it's faster if I fix
those and send v4 as a proper patch (no RFC anymore), naturally
attributing you as the author. Is that ok for you?

-- 
Kalle Valo
_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k