Re: [PATCH 09/28] Remove ATHEROS_AR231X

Sergey Ryazanov
2014-09-10T12:19:24Z

2014-09-10 15:36 GMT+04:00, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>:
> On 09/10/2014, 12:33 PM, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
>> 2014-09-09 22:27 GMT+04:00, John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>:
>>> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 04:02:10PM +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
>>>> 2014-09-05 15:33 GMT+04:00 Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>:
>>>>> Hi Sergey,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 15:12 +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
>>>>>> 2014-09-05 14:10 GMT+04:00, Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 13:46 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
>>>>>>>> Having this conversation every rc1 is getting a bit silly. Could
>>>>>>>> Jiri
>>>>>>>> e.a. perhaps set some specific deadline for ATHEROS_AR231X to be
>>>>>>>> submitted?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I waited until rc3. Have you seen any activity on this front? If
>>>>>>> not,
>>>>>>> should I resend the patch that removes the code in mainline that
>>>>>>> depends
>>>>>>> on ATHEROS_AR231X (ie, AHB bus support)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Recent activity always could be found in [1]. Now I finish another
>>>>>> one
>>>>>> round of cleanups and have a plan to fix several things (you can
>>>>>> always find something that you really want to improve). But if you
>>>>>> insist I could immediately switch to "send upstream" mode. And seems
>>>>>> that this would be better approach.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. https://dev.openwrt.org/log/trunk/target/linux/atheros
>>>>>
>>>>> And where can the related PULL requests or patch submissions be found?
>>>>>
>>>> I have not sent patches yet, since I thought that it would be easier
>>>> to cleanup them in openwrt tree and then send them upstream.
>>>
>>> That excuse has worn a bit thin. Perhaps Paul should repost his
>>> removal and you can add a revert to the start of your patch series?
>>>
>> As for me, I do not like such flapping
>
> Agreed in case what you have is in a good enough shape. You (and also
> others) can still clean up the code in upstream too. So, if it is
> mergeable, send it for upstream inclusion now, otherwise I am all for
> John to apply the Paul's patch.

Two days is the last deadline :)

> The unused code has been a way too long
> in the tree now.

Code actively used in owrt firmware and its forks.

--
BR,
Sergey