On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 02:46:04PM +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote: > Hi Felix, > > On Monday 12 March 2012 02:32 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote: > >On 2012-03-12 6:57 AM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote: > >>From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<mohammed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >>not sure if these checks are previously avoided may be those revision of > >>chipsets are obselete ? > >NACK. The extra checks that this patch adds have been intentionally > >removed, since all earlier versions were never sold and thus do not need > >to be considered. This simplifies the generated binary code. > > IMHO i don't think this patch does anything wrong to deserve a NACK! > sometimes these optimizations make it tad difficult if we want to > quickly check with the HAL code. "HAL" code from internal codebases need to change, not the other way around. You have your priorities wrong. I support the NACK. 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
