On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 11:36:02 +0300 Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On 8/17/2018 9:49 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: > >> Ajay Singh <ajay.kathat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> > >>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 13:53:50 +0300 > >>> Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>>> > >>>>> From wireless point of view: if I see wext mentioned anywhere > >>>>> in the driver I stop right there. cfg80211 is a hard > >>>>> requirement for us nowadays. > >>>> > >>>> Clarification: Depending on the hardware design either cfg80211 > >>>> or mac80211 is a hard requirement. I haven't checked wilc1000 at > >>>> all so I don't know what design it has but if it's a "softmac" > >>>> design then it has to use mac80211, we do not want to support > >>>> multiple 802.11 UMAC stacks. > >>>> > >>> > >>> The TODO item to make use of wext-core is obsolete. Previously > >>> wilc1000 driver also had few wext ioctl use but now it’s > >>> completely removed and cfg80211 operation callbacks are used. > >>> > >>> wilc1000 driver make use of cfg80211 and isn’t a "softmac". > >> > >> Good. > >> > >>> We need help to review and identify if there are any pending items > >>> for wilc1000 driver, so we can address those issues and make it > >>> ready to move to the wireless subsystem. > >> > >> I think the best way to get that forward is to submit a patch (or > >> patchset) to linux-wireless, that's the easiest for reviewers. > > > > For brcm80211 drivers we used a single patch introducing it under > > the wireless drivers folder. Because it was quite a sizable patch we > > parked it on the wireless wiki page. Had a few iterations doing it > > like that. > > Another option is to split it so that there's one patch per file, > should be even pretty easy to automate that. It's just so much easier > to comment on a patch submitted by email compared to the reviewer > manually copying code and then commenting it, yuck. > Sure. I will prepare a patch per file send for review as its easy to review. As Greg suggested, I will wait for the merge window to close and after completing pending patches to staging, I will start the review. For my understanding, the patches for review will be based on wireless-testing branch. And the fixes will be submitted to staging tree in parallel. right? Regards, Ajay
