lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Sep]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 09/28] Remove ATHEROS_AR231X
On 09/10/2014, 12:33 PM, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
> 2014-09-09 22:27 GMT+04:00, John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>:
>> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 04:02:10PM +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
>>> 2014-09-05 15:33 GMT+04:00 Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>:
>>>> Hi Sergey,
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 15:12 +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
>>>>> 2014-09-05 14:10 GMT+04:00, Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 13:46 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
>>>>>>> Having this conversation every rc1 is getting a bit silly. Could
>>>>>>> Jiri
>>>>>>> e.a. perhaps set some specific deadline for ATHEROS_AR231X to be
>>>>>>> submitted?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I waited until rc3. Have you seen any activity on this front? If
>>>>>> not,
>>>>>> should I resend the patch that removes the code in mainline that
>>>>>> depends
>>>>>> on ATHEROS_AR231X (ie, AHB bus support)?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Recent activity always could be found in [1]. Now I finish another one
>>>>> round of cleanups and have a plan to fix several things (you can
>>>>> always find something that you really want to improve). But if you
>>>>> insist I could immediately switch to "send upstream" mode. And seems
>>>>> that this would be better approach.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. https://dev.openwrt.org/log/trunk/target/linux/atheros
>>>>
>>>> And where can the related PULL requests or patch submissions be found?
>>>>
>>> I have not sent patches yet, since I thought that it would be easier
>>> to cleanup them in openwrt tree and then send them upstream.
>>
>> That excuse has worn a bit thin. Perhaps Paul should repost his
>> removal and you can add a revert to the start of your patch series?
>>
> As for me, I do not like such flapping

Agreed in case what you have is in a good enough shape. You (and also
others) can still clean up the code in upstream too. So, if it is
mergeable, send it for upstream inclusion now, otherwise I am all for
John to apply the Paul's patch. The unused code has been a way too long
in the tree now.

thanks,
--
js


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-09-10 14:01    [W:0.489 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site