* wireless-testing or wireless-next @ 2010-09-17 2:48 Bruno Randolf 2010-09-17 3:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Bruno Randolf @ 2010-09-17 2:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: John W. Linville; +Cc: linux-wireless, lrodriguez John, Luis, I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we send them? Also, AFAIK, compat-wireless is based on linux-next, so if I want to create a compat-wireless package based on my latest driver changes (I need to do this frequently for testing my driver on my platform), I always run into problems because my latest driver is in wireless-testing and not in linux-next. Do you have any advise on a proper workflow here? Thanks, bruno ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: wireless-testing or wireless-next 2010-09-17 2:48 wireless-testing or wireless-next Bruno Randolf @ 2010-09-17 3:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2010-09-18 0:19 ` John W. Linville 2010-09-18 18:51 ` Ben Greear 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Luis R. Rodriguez @ 2010-09-17 3:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bruno Randolf; +Cc: John W. Linville, linux-wireless On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf <br1@einfach.org> wrote: > John, Luis, > > I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver > development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into > wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we > send them? Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just lets you actually boot a usable kernel. > Also, AFAIK, compat-wireless is based on linux-next, so if I want to create a > compat-wireless package based on my latest driver changes (I need to do this > frequently for testing my driver on my platform), I always run into problems > because my latest driver is in wireless-testing and not in linux-next. Do you > have any advise on a proper workflow here? I have a "wl" branch for wireless-testing too :) the master branch is for linux-next. Luis ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: wireless-testing or wireless-next 2010-09-17 3:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez @ 2010-09-18 0:19 ` John W. Linville 2010-09-18 4:01 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2010-09-18 18:51 ` Ben Greear 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: John W. Linville @ 2010-09-18 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Luis R. Rodriguez; +Cc: Bruno Randolf, linux-wireless On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 08:02:26PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf <br1@einfach.org> wrote: > > John, Luis, > > > > I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver > > development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into > > wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we > > send them? > > Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just > lets you actually boot a usable kernel. Actually, I generally prefer that patches target wireless-testing. In the even of conflicts between that and wireless-next-2.6, I can usually sort them out myself. If not, I'll ask. > > Also, AFAIK, compat-wireless is based on linux-next, so if I want to create a > > compat-wireless package based on my latest driver changes (I need to do this > > frequently for testing my driver on my platform), I always run into problems > > because my latest driver is in wireless-testing and not in linux-next. Do you > > have any advise on a proper workflow here? > > I have a "wl" branch for wireless-testing too :) the master branch is > for linux-next. Actually, there will almost never be anything in wireless-testing that isn't in linux-next. linux-next pulls from wireless-next-2.6, just as wireless-testing does. John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: wireless-testing or wireless-next 2010-09-18 0:19 ` John W. Linville @ 2010-09-18 4:01 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Luis R. Rodriguez @ 2010-09-18 4:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: John W. Linville; +Cc: Bruno Randolf, linux-wireless On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 5:19 PM, John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 08:02:26PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf <br1@einfach.org> wrote: >> > John, Luis, >> > >> > I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver >> > development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into >> > wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we >> > send them? >> >> Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just >> lets you actually boot a usable kernel. > > Actually, I generally prefer that patches target wireless-testing. > In the even of conflicts between that and wireless-next-2.6, I can > usually sort them out myself. If not, I'll ask. Ah thanks :) >> > Also, AFAIK, compat-wireless is based on linux-next, so if I want to create a >> > compat-wireless package based on my latest driver changes (I need to do this >> > frequently for testing my driver on my platform), I always run into problems >> > because my latest driver is in wireless-testing and not in linux-next. Do you >> > have any advise on a proper workflow here? >> >> I have a "wl" branch for wireless-testing too :) the master branch is >> for linux-next. > > Actually, there will almost never be anything in wireless-testing > that isn't in linux-next. linux-next pulls from wireless-next-2.6, > just as wireless-testing does. True, except Ethernet updates get merged into linux-next too and I rely on that for some of our Ethernet drivers updated too. Luis ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: wireless-testing or wireless-next 2010-09-17 3:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2010-09-18 0:19 ` John W. Linville @ 2010-09-18 18:51 ` Ben Greear 2010-09-20 14:42 ` John W. Linville 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Ben Greear @ 2010-09-18 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Luis R. Rodriguez; +Cc: Bruno Randolf, John W. Linville, linux-wireless On 09/16/2010 08:02 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf<br1@einfach.org> wrote: >> John, Luis, >> >> I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver >> development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into >> wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we >> send them? > > Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just > lets you actually boot a usable kernel. I saw what looked like a nice series of patches from you four days ago (power save, etc). But, they have not been applied to wireless-testing. Is there a tree that does contain these sorts of patches, or must we manually apply them to our own trees if we want to try them out? Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: wireless-testing or wireless-next 2010-09-18 18:51 ` Ben Greear @ 2010-09-20 14:42 ` John W. Linville 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: John W. Linville @ 2010-09-20 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Greear; +Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez, Bruno Randolf, linux-wireless On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:51:14AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > On 09/16/2010 08:02 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf<br1@einfach.org> wrote: > >>John, Luis, > >> > >>I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver > >>development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into > >>wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we > >>send them? > > > >Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just > >lets you actually boot a usable kernel. > > I saw what looked like a nice series of patches from you four days ago > (power save, etc). But, they have not been applied to wireless-testing. > > Is there a tree that does contain these sorts of patches, or must > we manually apply them to our own trees if we want to try them out? You are just a bit unlucky in this case... I actually did have them in wireless-testing...on my machine. :-( I had a little merge/push hiccup that should be resolved now -- must have been in too much of a hurry for my day-off on Friday! Sorry for the inconvenience! John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-09-20 14:44 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2010-09-17 2:48 wireless-testing or wireless-next Bruno Randolf 2010-09-17 3:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2010-09-18 0:19 ` John W. Linville 2010-09-18 4:01 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2010-09-18 18:51 ` Ben Greear 2010-09-20 14:42 ` John W. Linville
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).