From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-lf0-f67.google.com ([209.85.215.67]:36733 "EHLO mail-lf0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750913AbdBSNUv (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Feb 2017 08:20:51 -0500 Received: by mail-lf0-f67.google.com with SMTP id o140so552176lff.3 for ; Sun, 19 Feb 2017 05:19:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [RFC v3 0/8] ath10k sdio support To: "Valo, Kalle" References: <1484342771-6160-1-git-send-email-erik.stromdahl@gmail.com> <87fujbhb29.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <1c87e0d1-1f14-08bb-2a69-650788fba8dc@gmail.com> <877f4ngii5.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "ath10k@lists.infradead.org ;" From: Erik Stromdahl Message-ID: <7b204d34-b791-ea78-cf4e-90e8fe1b79fb@gmail.com> (sfid-20170219_142056_399168_05BAD1F6) Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 14:19:48 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <877f4ngii5.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hej, I just noticed that Ryan Hsu submitted two patches containing similar functionality to what I have in my tree on github. They have not been integrated in the ath master yet, but they have been added to master-pending. Below are the commits I am talking about bc1054a15be3c962c83aa22476a3e9c1266da792 ath10k: improve the firmware download time for QCA9377 db5af2a25bd8c1410ec4456d1d4f4e6ded2649ca ath10k: improve the firmware download time for QCA6174 Since some of my patches overlap with these I think it would be best if I add these to my tree and rewrite my patches. If they haven't made it into master before I submit my updated patch series I will include them in my set. Is this OK? If they will be added to master soon there is no issue since I will of course rebase to the latest ath-YYYYMMDDHHmm before I submit anything. /Erik On 2017-02-19 00:57, Valo, Kalle wrote: > Erik Stromdahl writes: > >> I was actually about to email you about this. >> >> I have made a few more updates to the sdio code so I think it would be >> best if I could submit a new series of patches based on this code (v4). >> >> Then you can tweak it (v5). >> >> It is only minor updates to the HIF layer (added QCA9377 support) and >> a setup of some pll registers. > > Ok, that sounds good. I'll wait for v4. > >> btw, should I still mark them as RFC or should it be PATCH this time? >> >> If I go for PATCH, should the version be v4 or should I start from v1? > > v4 would be fine. Thanks. >