> From: linux-wireless-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-wireless- > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Büsch > Sent: donderdag 22 september 2011 1:29 > To: Brett Rudley > Cc: Rafał Miłecki; Greg KH; John W. Linville; Franky (Zhenhui) Lin; > gregkh@xxxxxxx; devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/20] staging: brcm80211: 7th reaction for > mainline patch #2 > > On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:15:10 -0700 > "Brett Rudley" <brudley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > We did however initially propose (and implement) a dividing line of > ssb chips for b43 and AXI based chips for brcmsmac but b43 team chose > to ignore/reject that. > > Well, what about embedded, for instance? The brcmsmac driver has been tested on a MIPS platform by Jonas Gorski although only in STA mode (on a bcm63xx). Not having AP mode has been explained in other emails. Also we fully intend to transition to BCMA but that would also be new feature added. Having AP mode and BCMA would enable you guys for using it in the embedded targets, right? > > I'm not totally opposed to that idea but it does not solve the > primary issue of conflicting b43 and brcmsmac modules. > > I'm not convinced that this is an issue at all and I'm not convinced > that it has to be resolved. > At least not now. > It never hurts to look ahead. Both drivers have their use in the linux tree and we should align which driver is doing what. Apparently we should have yelled really hard when b43 was adding bcma support, because then it snatched the chipsets we support as well. You learn your lessons the hard way in Linux land, or so it seems ;-) Gr. AvS _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
