On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 06:11:47PM -0700, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 22:47 -0700, lrodriguez@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vasanth@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c
> > index 47d4891..d9c7561 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c
> > @@ -508,9 +508,10 @@ int ath_chainmask_sel_logic(struct ath_softc *sc, struct ath_node *an)
> > * enabled/disabled setting
> > */
> > if ((sc->sc_no_tx_3_chains == AH_FALSE) ||
> > - (sc->sc_config.chainmask_sel == AH_FALSE))
> > + (sc->sc_config.chainmask_sel == AH_FALSE)) {
> > cm->cur_tx_mask = sc->sc_tx_chainmask;
> > return cm->cur_tx_mask;
> > + }
>
> I would prefer that all compile fixes are amended in the patches that
> introduced them. We should try to pass only correct patches upstream.
> Bisection works best if one doesn't hit code that doesn't compile.
The patch that caused this was not *one* patch but the introduction
patch. This is why I put this in a separate patch. If we want to start
out fresh that's another thing and I can just submit a shiny new driver
introduction patch. But I don't think that is required at this point
since this driver hasn't been merged yet. At this point users are
using this from ath9k.git and from patches posted on the lists. At
this point though I would like to keep the patches separated as we
did receive a good number of contributions from the community. It also
shows the changes we've made so far since our initial release.
Luis
--
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
