From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from bu3sch.de ([62.75.166.246]:34219 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753762AbZFBPRF (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jun 2009 11:17:05 -0400 From: Michael Buesch To: matthieu castet Subject: Re: b43 vs b43legacy Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 17:17:01 +0200 Cc: Larry Finger , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <4A20505D.40908@lwfinger.net> <4A244C5A.50307@free.fr> In-Reply-To: <4A244C5A.50307@free.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200906021717.01320.mb@bu3sch.de> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Monday 01 June 2009 23:47:06 matthieu castet wrote: > Ok but what prevent b43 to support core 4 chip with v4 firmware like the > broadcom driver does ? > I am aware that the current driver doesn't support it, but what are the > missing part to support it ? Recent broadcom drivers do not support <=rev4 anymore. There are lots of differences between those devices and devices >=rev5. So we chose to fork it. That's it. It's as simple as that. Why does it surprise you that much? Lots of other devices require a separate driver for legacy devices, too. -- Greetings, Michael.