Alexis Lothoré <alexis.lothore@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 1/23/24 12:06, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Alexis Lothoré <alexis.lothore@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> On 1/22/24 23:03, David Mosberger-Tang wrote: >>>> Previously, the driver created a net device (typically wlan0) as soon >>>> as the module was loaded. This commit changes the driver to follow >>>> normal Linux convention of creating the net device only when bus >>>> probing detects a supported chip. >>> >>> I would gladly help review/test the patch, but please give us some time between >>> versions to take a look (even if you can mention if you found issues yourself). >>> Also, each version should be a separate thread, bearing the new version in the >>> "Subject" line. >>> Additionally (to answer your cover letter), the patches must target the wireless >>> branches (likely wireless-testing), not linux-next >>> (https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/git-guide) >> >> Actually wireless-next is preferred for the baseline (unless it's a fix >> going to -rc releases): >> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wireless/wireless-next.git/ > > Oh, ok, thanks for the correction, I may have misinterpreted the wiki then Ah, we should update that page. That page was written before we had common wireless and wireless-next trees. I don't know Johannes thoughts on this but my recommendation for baseline: * use wireless tree for important fixes going to -rc releases * for other patches use either driver specific tree (eg. iwlwifi, mt76, ath) or wireless-next (if no driver specific tree available) * for automated testing etc. use wireless-testing as it's a merge of wireless and wireless-next and contains all latest code -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
