brcmsmac tx patches for 3.7
Hi John,
When Seth posted his rework on brcmsmac transmit, we had a number of patches ready in the same area albeit less rigorous. With Seth's patches lined up in wireless-next for 3.8, I am wondering what to do here. Should I send our patches against the wireless tree? These patches will definitely result in conflicts when merging to wireless-next, which you typically do. Actually, we do not want these patches in wireless-next as rework from Seth makes them irrelevant.
Any advice on this?
Gr. AvS
Quoted 9 lines · Arend van Spriel
When Seth posted his rework on brcmsmac transmit, we had a number of patches ready in the same area albeit less rigorous. With Seth's patches lined up in wireless-next for 3.8, I am wondering what to do here. Should I send our patches against the wireless tree? These patches will definitely result in conflicts when merging to wireless-next, which you typically do. Actually, we do not want these patches in wireless-next as rework from Seth makes them irrelevant.
Any advice on this?
If they are fixes, then they should be small and obvious -- hopefully that makes the merging relatively easy? You might try applying them to a local wireless tree and pulling that into a local copy of wireless-next, then resolving the conflicts locally so that you can give me some idea of any tricky merges?
John
Signature · 2 lines
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you [email protected] might be all we have. Be ready.
Quoted 12 lines · John W. Linville
Quoted 9 lines · Arend van Spriel
When Seth posted his rework on brcmsmac transmit, we had a number of patches ready in the same area albeit less rigorous. With Seth's patches lined up in wireless-next for 3.8, I am wondering what to do here. Should I send our patches against the wireless tree? These patches will definitely result in conflicts when merging to wireless-next, which you typically do. Actually, we do not want these patches in wireless-next as rework from Seth makes them irrelevant.
Any advice on this?
Quoted 8 lines
If they are fixes, then they should be small and obvious -- hopefully that makes the merging relatively easy? You might try applying them to a local wireless tree and pulling that into a local copy of wireless-next, then resolving the conflicts locally so that you can give me some idea of any tricky merges?
John
Hi John,
I did already (re)submit the one 3.7 patch to you fixing a slab corruption. As the code is reworked pretty significantly (removing packets queues) in 3.8, I have a similar patch for 3.8 that I intend to submit soon. So merge of the 3.7 patch can be ignored for wireless-next.
Gr. AvS