All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>, Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>,
	Pkshih <pkshih@realtek.com>,
	"linux-wireless\@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k\@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>,
	Wen Gong <wgong@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] nl80211: vendor-cmd: qca: add dynamic SAR power limits
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 05:55:01 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <010101746c4824a0-4044dcc3-3713-4231-9789-fecff5795c43-000000@us-west-2.amazonses.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c3ef60c2263a6840d21f6a797ad3ffb685a728b8.camel@sipsolutions.net> (Johannes Berg's message of "Thu, 30 Jul 2020 15:24:11 +0200")

Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes:

> On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 12:26 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
>
>> > > So to me it feels like the best solution forward is to go with the
>> > > vendor API, do you agree? We can, of course, later switch to the common
>> > > API if we manage to create one which is usable for everyone.
>
> But why wouldn't we try that now, while we have it all in our heads (in
> a way ... even if this discussion drags out forever)?
>
> I mean, the range-based approach ought to work, and if we define it as a
> nested attribute list or so, we can even later add more attributes to it
> (chain limits, whatnot) without any backward compatibility concerns.
>
> So what is it that we _cannot_ do in a more common way today?
>
>> > I think we've had some healthy (though very protracted) discussion,
>> > and I don't think I've seen anyone bring up anything I wasn't already
>> > aware of that would prevent eventual consolidation. As long as we
>> > acknowledge those things (item 2 at
>> > https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/nl80211#vendor-specific_api),
>> > I'm happy.
>> 
>> Good, I was just checking that we all are on the same page.
>
> But are we? ;-)
>
> I don't really see anything in the new proposal [1] that really explains
> why the common API that we've sort of vaguely outlined in this thread
> couldn't work? It just speaks of technical difficulties ("need a
> reporting API too"), but should we let that stop us?
>
> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11686317/

I misunderstood then, I thought everyone were leaning towards the vendor
API approach. But yeah, of course a common API is much better if people
think it's doable.

So I'll now drop all the vendor API patches from patchwork and
assume/hope that we will get the common API at some point.

-- 
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-09-08  5:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-18 15:48 [PATCH 0/2] ath10k: SAR power limit vendor command Kalle Valo
2019-12-18 15:48 ` Kalle Valo
2019-12-18 15:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] nl80211: vendor-cmd: qca: add dynamic SAR power limits Kalle Valo
2019-12-18 15:48   ` Kalle Valo
2019-12-19  9:44   ` Pkshih
2019-12-19  9:44     ` Pkshih
2019-12-19 15:48     ` Jouni Malinen
2019-12-19 15:48       ` Jouni Malinen
2019-12-19 18:32       ` Brian Norris
2019-12-19 18:32         ` Brian Norris
2019-12-19 18:55         ` Jouni Malinen
2019-12-19 18:55           ` Jouni Malinen
2019-12-19 23:40           ` Brian Norris
2019-12-19 23:40             ` Brian Norris
2020-03-17 16:54             ` Kalle Valo
2020-03-17 16:54               ` Kalle Valo
2020-03-20 12:55               ` Johannes Berg
2020-03-20 12:55                 ` Johannes Berg
2020-06-02  1:32                 ` Brian Norris
2020-06-02  1:32                   ` Brian Norris
2020-07-16  9:35                   ` Kalle Valo
2020-07-16  9:35                     ` Kalle Valo
2020-07-16 18:56                     ` Brian Norris
2020-07-16 18:56                       ` Brian Norris
2020-07-24  9:26                       ` Kalle Valo
2020-07-24  9:26                         ` Kalle Valo
2020-07-30 13:24                         ` Johannes Berg
2020-07-30 13:24                           ` Johannes Berg
2020-08-01  1:31                           ` Brian Norris
2020-08-01  1:31                             ` Brian Norris
2020-09-08  5:55                           ` Kalle Valo
2020-09-08  5:55                           ` Kalle Valo [this message]
2020-07-30 13:17                   ` Johannes Berg
2020-07-30 13:17                     ` Johannes Berg
2019-12-18 15:48 ` [PATCH 2/2] ath10k: allow dynamic SAR power limits to be configured Kalle Valo
2019-12-18 15:48   ` Kalle Valo
2019-12-19  9:45   ` Pkshih
2019-12-19  9:45     ` Pkshih
2020-04-16  7:38   ` Kalle Valo
2020-04-16  7:38   ` Kalle Valo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=010101746c4824a0-4044dcc3-3713-4231-9789-fecff5795c43-000000@us-west-2.amazonses.com \
    --to=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
    --cc=j@w1.fi \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pkshih@realtek.com \
    --cc=wgong@codeaurora.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.