> From: linux-wireless-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-wireless- > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christoph Hellwig > Sent: donderdag 22 september 2011 16:31 > To: Brett Rudley > Cc: Rafa?? Mi??ecki; 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, Sep 21, 2011 at 03:12:02PM -0700, Brett Rudley wrote: > > > > Our original plan was to remain a separate driver from b43. We > were > > > aware of it and all the good work that had been done to create it > and we > > > had no intention of interfering with it. ??At that point there had > not > > > been very much recent movement in b43 and it did not support any of > our > > > AXI based chips. ??We figured that ssb vs AXI was a good dividing > line and > > > there would be no conflict, and there wasn't initially. > > > > > > The first obvious problem is that there are SSB and BCMA (aka AXI) > > > cards using N-PHY. That resulted in PHY code duplication between > b43 > > > and brcmsmac. And since we already supported N-PHY in b43, adding > bcma > > > support automatically gave us BCM43224 and BCM43225 support. That > of > > > course means duplicated supported for the same hardware. > > > > Agree, when you created bcma, it did duplicate HW support already in > brcmsmac. Why didn't you address that then? > > Because doing inside a driver is wrong. bcma is a separate bus layer > and really must stay outside the driver. It can very reasonably argued > that the same is true for the PHY support. I am not disputing that the bcma bus driver was a good move, but there are numerous chip devices out there with an internal bus of some sore and not having a separate bus driver. Regarding PHY support compared to a system bus on a chip is comparing apples with pears. However, as said earlier we are not opposed to the idea. > Given the arguments from Johannes and other I think the only reasonable > outcome here is to make sure the broadcom drivers share > > a) the bcma bus support (already done), and > b) the phy layer > > and just make them the driver for the newer MAC revisions. A BCMA bus driver and PHY layer does not give a wireless driver. Am I missing something? > (and stop those fight already, shh..) I thought this was just an open and lively discussion ;-) Gr. AvS _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
