* wireless-testing or wireless-next
@ 2010-09-17 2:48 Bruno Randolf
2010-09-17 3:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Bruno Randolf @ 2010-09-17 2:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John W. Linville; +Cc: linux-wireless, lrodriguez
John, Luis,
I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver
development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into
wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we
send them?
Also, AFAIK, compat-wireless is based on linux-next, so if I want to create a
compat-wireless package based on my latest driver changes (I need to do this
frequently for testing my driver on my platform), I always run into problems
because my latest driver is in wireless-testing and not in linux-next. Do you
have any advise on a proper workflow here?
Thanks,
bruno
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: wireless-testing or wireless-next
2010-09-17 2:48 wireless-testing or wireless-next Bruno Randolf
@ 2010-09-17 3:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-09-18 0:19 ` John W. Linville
2010-09-18 18:51 ` Ben Greear
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Luis R. Rodriguez @ 2010-09-17 3:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruno Randolf; +Cc: John W. Linville, linux-wireless
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf <br1@einfach.org> wrote:
> John, Luis,
>
> I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver
> development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into
> wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we
> send them?
Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just
lets you actually boot a usable kernel.
> Also, AFAIK, compat-wireless is based on linux-next, so if I want to create a
> compat-wireless package based on my latest driver changes (I need to do this
> frequently for testing my driver on my platform), I always run into problems
> because my latest driver is in wireless-testing and not in linux-next. Do you
> have any advise on a proper workflow here?
I have a "wl" branch for wireless-testing too :) the master branch is
for linux-next.
Luis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: wireless-testing or wireless-next
2010-09-17 3:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
@ 2010-09-18 0:19 ` John W. Linville
2010-09-18 4:01 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-09-18 18:51 ` Ben Greear
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: John W. Linville @ 2010-09-18 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Luis R. Rodriguez; +Cc: Bruno Randolf, linux-wireless
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 08:02:26PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf <br1@einfach.org> wrote:
> > John, Luis,
> >
> > I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver
> > development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into
> > wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we
> > send them?
>
> Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just
> lets you actually boot a usable kernel.
Actually, I generally prefer that patches target wireless-testing.
In the even of conflicts between that and wireless-next-2.6, I can
usually sort them out myself. If not, I'll ask.
> > Also, AFAIK, compat-wireless is based on linux-next, so if I want to create a
> > compat-wireless package based on my latest driver changes (I need to do this
> > frequently for testing my driver on my platform), I always run into problems
> > because my latest driver is in wireless-testing and not in linux-next. Do you
> > have any advise on a proper workflow here?
>
> I have a "wl" branch for wireless-testing too :) the master branch is
> for linux-next.
Actually, there will almost never be anything in wireless-testing
that isn't in linux-next. linux-next pulls from wireless-next-2.6,
just as wireless-testing does.
John
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: wireless-testing or wireless-next
2010-09-18 0:19 ` John W. Linville
@ 2010-09-18 4:01 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Luis R. Rodriguez @ 2010-09-18 4:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John W. Linville; +Cc: Bruno Randolf, linux-wireless
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 5:19 PM, John W. Linville
<linville@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 08:02:26PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf <br1@einfach.org> wrote:
>> > John, Luis,
>> >
>> > I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver
>> > development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into
>> > wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we
>> > send them?
>>
>> Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just
>> lets you actually boot a usable kernel.
>
> Actually, I generally prefer that patches target wireless-testing.
> In the even of conflicts between that and wireless-next-2.6, I can
> usually sort them out myself. If not, I'll ask.
Ah thanks :)
>> > Also, AFAIK, compat-wireless is based on linux-next, so if I want to create a
>> > compat-wireless package based on my latest driver changes (I need to do this
>> > frequently for testing my driver on my platform), I always run into problems
>> > because my latest driver is in wireless-testing and not in linux-next. Do you
>> > have any advise on a proper workflow here?
>>
>> I have a "wl" branch for wireless-testing too :) the master branch is
>> for linux-next.
>
> Actually, there will almost never be anything in wireless-testing
> that isn't in linux-next. linux-next pulls from wireless-next-2.6,
> just as wireless-testing does.
True, except Ethernet updates get merged into linux-next too and I
rely on that for some of our Ethernet drivers updated too.
Luis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: wireless-testing or wireless-next
2010-09-17 3:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-09-18 0:19 ` John W. Linville
@ 2010-09-18 18:51 ` Ben Greear
2010-09-20 14:42 ` John W. Linville
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ben Greear @ 2010-09-18 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Luis R. Rodriguez; +Cc: Bruno Randolf, John W. Linville, linux-wireless
On 09/16/2010 08:02 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf<br1@einfach.org> wrote:
>> John, Luis,
>>
>> I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver
>> development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into
>> wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we
>> send them?
>
> Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just
> lets you actually boot a usable kernel.
I saw what looked like a nice series of patches from you four days ago
(power save, etc). But, they have not been applied to wireless-testing.
Is there a tree that does contain these sorts of patches, or must
we manually apply them to our own trees if we want to try them out?
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: wireless-testing or wireless-next
2010-09-18 18:51 ` Ben Greear
@ 2010-09-20 14:42 ` John W. Linville
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: John W. Linville @ 2010-09-20 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Greear; +Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez, Bruno Randolf, linux-wireless
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:51:14AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
> On 09/16/2010 08:02 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf<br1@einfach.org> wrote:
> >>John, Luis,
> >>
> >>I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver
> >>development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into
> >>wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we
> >>send them?
> >
> >Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just
> >lets you actually boot a usable kernel.
>
> I saw what looked like a nice series of patches from you four days ago
> (power save, etc). But, they have not been applied to wireless-testing.
>
> Is there a tree that does contain these sorts of patches, or must
> we manually apply them to our own trees if we want to try them out?
You are just a bit unlucky in this case...
I actually did have them in wireless-testing...on my machine. :-(
I had a little merge/push hiccup that should be resolved now --
must have been in too much of a hurry for my day-off on Friday!
Sorry for the inconvenience!
John
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-09-20 14:44 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-09-17 2:48 wireless-testing or wireless-next Bruno Randolf
2010-09-17 3:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-09-18 0:19 ` John W. Linville
2010-09-18 4:01 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-09-18 18:51 ` Ben Greear
2010-09-20 14:42 ` John W. Linville
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.