On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 13:44 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote: > > First we should revert these patches. FWIW, I've just done that, if only to make the mt76 merge possible. > We can respin them shortly after in a modified form where > ieee80211_next_txq takes a 'queue' argument. I'll leave the two of you to discuss that :-) > I'm almost done with the incremental change for that, and it also > supports passing -1 for queue so incrementally switching to the > scheduling that you're proposing will also work. Sounds fine to me. > With that in place we can replace the ath9k change with a much smaller > patch that is easier to verify for correctness and won't introduce the > potential regressions that I pointed out. > > I will take care of the mt76 porting today and I'll also help with > sorting out the ath10k issues. So are you going to resend Toke's patches with your adjustments folded in? Or just one of them? johannes
