Michael Buesch wrote: > > Nice work, but as it's a spec of another driver implementation rather > > than hardware (or even the firmware API) I don't think it should be > > so authoritative. If other values are clearly better why not use > > them? > > What crap are you smoking? Maybe we just miscommunicated, or maybe I misunderstood something about the reverse engineering process. I am very new to this project. > The b43 and b43-legacy driver are _based_ on these specifications. > There are no other specs available. I know. Allow me to clarify my train of thought: * Specs are created by reverse engineering of a binary blob. * After development of b43*, many can happily use the drivers. \o/ * As it turns out, b43* can be made even more reliable by doing things slightly different than what the specs say. Case in point looping a little longer. At this point, if there are only/mostly benefits, I don't see why deviating from the specs is bad - after all they "only" document another driver, right? //Peter -- 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
