From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([147.243.1.48]:37373 "EHLO mgw-sa02.nokia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753716Ab0K3HP6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Nov 2010 02:15:58 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 ] wl12xx: BA Initiator support From: Luciano Coelho To: ext Ohad Ben-Cohen Cc: Shahar Levi , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <1291038135-20672-1-git-send-email-shahar_levi@ti.com> <1291097500.1673.100.camel@powerslave> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 09:15:52 +0200 Message-ID: <1291101352.1673.112.camel@powerslave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 23:07 -0800, ext Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 10:11 PM, Luciano Coelho > wrote: > ... > > In theory the API *has* changed, not just extended. Check this: > > > > - ACX_BA_SESSION_RESPONDER_POLICY = 0x0055, > > - ACX_BA_SESSION_INITIATOR_POLICY = 0x0056, > > + ACX_BA_SESSION_POLICY_CFG = 0x0055, > > + ACX_BA_SESSION_RX_SETUP = 0x0056, > > > > But in practice, this doesn't matter, because we were not using the > > RESPONDER/INITIATOR commands before... > > Right. So an old driver will still work with this new firmware. > > > It's basically just those two extra commands that were added. And one > > new event that is part of a future patch. > > > > In theory, we could check the firmware revision after boot and bail out > > if the version doesn't match. > > Why not just disable BA sessions in this case (and keep that new event > masked), and let the driver keep running (just like it does today) ? > > This way the new driver will work even with the old firmware (yes, > with degraded functionality, but most random ppl will just not care), > and of course, the old driver will keep working with the new firmware. > > For us developers who lurk in linux-wireless it seems like a trivial > change, but if we consider the growing size of the 12xx community, and > the long period of time for which such a change will be effective (ppl > upgrading to latest compat, ppl that will one day upgrade to 2.6.38, > future ppl that will bisect and cross this firmware name change, > etc...), it's actually a lot of accumulated pain. > > To keep our community happy, I vote to eliminate this pain when not necessary. Hear, hear! Shahar, can you fix that? -- Cheers, Luca.