From: Holger Schurig <hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de>
To: Daniel Mack <daniel@caiaq.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
Bing Zhao <bzhao@marvell.com>,
libertas-dev@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/wireless/libertas: do not call wiphy_unregister() w/o wiphy_register()
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 12:59:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201003301259.23973.hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100330105029.GO30801@buzzloop.caiaq.de>
> I don't get your point. The patch I submitted fixes an Ooops in the
> driver, due to wrong handling of an API. What does that have to do with
> principle discussions about the frameworks in use?
I asked if there is a better method, and you said that you would test a better
solution. That means that someone else should make a better solution.
I just pointed out that I won't be the one who creates the better solution,
because for fundamental reasons I don't see the libertas+cfg80211 approach
going forward. That issue has nothing to do with you or your patch, so please
don't feel offended or confused.
Basically, I neither ack nor nak you patch. Given that it fixes an oops the
patch should go in, and probably to stable at well. I just gave a hint, to
make you think if you could come up with something better.
BTW, testing/fixing of failure paths in libertas as well as simplifying the
call sequence of functions during initialisation could be quite useful.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-30 10:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-29 15:14 [PATCH] net/wireless/libertas: do not call wiphy_unregister() w/o wiphy_register() Daniel Mack
2010-03-30 6:49 ` Holger Schurig
2010-03-30 8:52 ` Daniel Mack
2010-03-30 9:49 ` Holger Schurig
2010-03-30 10:50 ` Daniel Mack
2010-03-30 10:59 ` Holger Schurig [this message]
2010-03-30 17:04 ` Dan Williams
2010-03-30 17:20 ` John W. Linville
2010-04-08 19:03 ` John W. Linville
2010-04-09 13:51 ` Holger Schurig
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=201003301259.23973.hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de \
--to=hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de \
--cc=bzhao@marvell.com \
--cc=daniel@caiaq.de \
--cc=dcbw@redhat.com \
--cc=libertas-dev@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).