Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] wcn36xx: Transition driver to SMD client

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:21:59PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:

On Thu 08 Sep 10:35 PDT 2016, Kalle Valo wrote:

quoted

Bjorn Andersson [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Kalle Valo [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Bjorn Andersson [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

The wcn36xx wifi driver follows the life cycle of the WLAN_CTRL SMD
channel, as such it should be a SMD client. This patch makes this
transition, now that we have the necessary frameworks available.

Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <redacted>
---

Changes since v3:
- Made msg_header const in wcn36xx_smd_rsp_process()

Changes since v2:
- Correct the call to the new ieee80211_scan_completed()

 drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/dxe.c     | 16 +++---
 drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/main.c    | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
 drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/smd.c     | 31 +++++-------
 drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/smd.h     |  5 ++
 drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/wcn36xx.h | 21 +++-----
 5 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)

This doesn't compile for me:

I thought I mentioned this in the mail, sorry for missing that.

Maybe you did and I just forgot, I have a tendency to do that :)

quoted

There is a patch for this issue in linux-next already [1] which is
part of [2], which was part of the pull request to arm-soc for
inclusion in v4.9.

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9272457/
[2] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/agross/linux.git/tag/?h=qcom-drivers-for-4.9

So the commit in question is:

soc: qcom: smd: Correct compile stub prototypes
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/agross/linux.git/commit/?h=qcom-drivers-for-4.9&id=3a1281848830fcb3202cfd7ffe62d19641471d05

Correct

quoted

But that's not obviously in my tree yet, but I should have it after
4.9-rc1 is released. I think it's easiest that I wait for that before
applying these. Do you agree?

Would be nice to have it land sooner rather than later, but I'm okay
with this.

We could just treat the tag as immutable.  You can merge the tag in and arm-soc
can as well.  it'll just get nop'd the second time it is taken.  The only
downside is if arm-soc doesn't take my merge request.

Or we can wait till -rc1

Regards,

Andy