Linux wireless drivers development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Holger Schurig <hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de>
To: Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com>
Cc: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	libertas-dev@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libertas: implement new scanning logic
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 21:34:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200712042134.53084.hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1196787130.4772.2.camel@localhost.localdomain>

> So I tested this one, not the one from libertas-dev (which was posted
> a day earlier).  And this one seems fine.  Ack for commit to
> libertas-2.6.

Hmm, for the patch you just "acked" inofficially is already older.
I know at least two changes that I made since then:

* add a comment to the section where I change the basic rates by
  setting the high bit (your idea)

* adapt to the patch "ibertas: separate mesh connectivity from that
  of the main interface" that appeared in wireless-2.6/everything

Please note that my current patch doesn't apply anymore to 
wireless-2.6/everything (a.k.a wl26e). It might still apply to 
libertas-2.6, because this tree lacked (four hours ago) at least 4 
patches that are in wl26e.

>From the 40 mails about git, commits, patches, rebases etc I was not 
able to draw a real conclusion. I'm tending towards basing my patches 
against wl26e, so that John, Jeff etc can push the patches easily up. 
And if a patch still applies, I can commit/push the patch once you 
acked them. If the patch doesn't apply there, I'll post about this face 
in libertas-dev. I hope that helps all sides the most.


> Would you like me to confirm on SDIO?

Yes, please. I think the patch is hardware agnistic, but you can
never know because SDIO firmware != CF firmware != USB firmware.

  reply	other threads:[~2007-12-04 20:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-29  8:27 [PATCH] libertas: implement new scanning logic Holger Schurig
2007-11-29 19:38 ` Dan Williams
2007-12-04 16:52 ` Dan Williams
2007-12-04 20:34   ` Holger Schurig [this message]
2007-12-07 14:47   ` Holger Schurig
2007-12-07 17:57     ` Dan Williams
2007-12-07 18:05       ` David Woodhouse
2007-12-07 18:09         ` Dan Williams
2007-12-07 18:19           ` David Woodhouse
2007-12-07 18:24             ` Dan Williams
2007-12-07 18:33               ` David Woodhouse
2007-12-07 19:14                 ` Dan Williams
2007-12-07 19:34                   ` David Woodhouse
2007-12-07 18:12         ` Dan Williams

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=200712042134.53084.hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de \
    --to=hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de \
    --cc=dcbw@redhat.com \
    --cc=libertas-dev@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox