Hi On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Arend van Spriel <arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08/11/2013 02:48 PM, Jonas Gorski wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Arend van Spriel <arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> >>> From: Piotr Haber <phaber@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Add support for 4313 iPA variant. >>> It is a variant of already supported 4313 ePA, >>> so this patch adds the required PHY changes to >>> support it properly including an updated switch >>> control table for BT-combo card variants. >> >> >> Okay, I'll bite. Since this patch was already reverted once, it >> warrants some additional scrutiny. > > > That's the right attitude ;-) The revert made us cautious as well before > sending out this patch, but thanks for making the effort. > > >> First of all, the patch is quite large, and I wonder if it couldn't be >> split into smaller patches, especially as it looks like there are >> additional fixes/changes merged in it. > > > It indeed seems rather large. The original work from Piotr were two patches > that I squashed. I will break up this patch in more individual patches. > > John, > > Can you drop this patch from the series? > > >> Detailed comments below ... >> >>> Tested-by: Maximilian Engelhardt <maxi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Tested-by: David Costa <david@xxxxxxxxx> >>> Reviewed-by: Arend Van Spriel <arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Reviewed-by: Pieter-Paul Giesberts <pieterpg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Piotr Haber <phaber@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >> >> >> This is obviously a V2 (or V(n+1) where n was the reverted version), >> so there should be something describing the changes to the reverted >> version. Why should we trust it now to not break things again? (Yes, I >> see those Tested-bys ;-) > > > This is a gray area. The original patch was taken into the tree so I > considered this to be a new patch. > > We tested with a number of 4313 variants having some extra shipped that we > did not have at the time of the original patch. I looked up the revert patch > and noticed it is tagged with Reported-by. So I will ask David Herrmann to > test V(n+2) before sending it (if you don't mind n will be 0). If you add me to CC for the patch I will happily test it. But for now I have no idea which patches I should try so I will wait for the next revision, I guess? Thanks for letting me know! David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
