From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: W. Trevor King Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 08:46:38 -0500 Subject: rev-17 Broadcom core support in b43 and CONFIG_B43_BCMA_EXTRA In-Reply-To: <51261C0B.1040506@hauke-m.de> References: <20130221121722.GA23690@odin.tremily.us> <51261C0B.1040506@hauke-m.de> Message-ID: <20130221134637.GA24350@odin.tremily.us> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Hauke Mehrtens Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, "John W. Linville" , b43-dev@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 02:07:23PM +0100, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: > On 02/21/2013 01:17 PM, W. Trevor King wrote: > > I've been poking around in b43 and brcmsmac trying to wrap my head > > around device detection. Obviously, b43 and brcmsmac both support > > some devices, and since 4f3d09d (b43: add option to avoid > > duplicating device support with brcmsmac, 2012-01-11) overlapping > > devices have been masked behind CONFIG_B43_BCMA_EXTRA. At the time > > of that commit, brcmsmac didn't support the r17 cores, but support > > has since been added in 6f80f01 (brcmsmac: add support for cores > > with revision 17, 2012-12-07). Does that mean that b43 should move > > the r17 core entry into the masked-by-CONFIG_B43_BCMA_EXTRA block? > > Yes you could move that core id into the CONFIG_B43_BCMA_EXTRA block, > but this core was just found on Router SoCs and there you mostly want > to use AP mode, which brcmsmac does not support. So maybe a CONFIG_BRCM_BCMA_EXTRA to mask brcmsmac devices when b43 is the recommended module? -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: