From: "Alvin Šipraga" <ALSI@bang-olufsen.dk>
To: Kalle Valo <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Brian Norris <email@example.com>,
Jouni Malinen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Sustek Goran <email@example.com>,
Wen Gong <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath: add support for special 0x0 regulatory domain
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 12:10:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw)
On 12/23/20 12:01 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Brian Norris <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 7:43 PM Wen Gong <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> On 2020-12-21 05:06, Sustek Goran wrote:
>>>> Hi, on my ath10k Chipset,
>>>> afetr this patch i can not longer to initialize my card.
>>>> my dmesg log: So i need to revert this patch! Is my card need
>>>> aditional support? Can you please guide what to do for my card to ahve
>>>> OOB support in streamline kernels?
>>> If this patch introduce issue to you,
>>> I think you can try to revert this patch.
>> Kalle is still planning on applying my revert patch someday, I think:
>> We just have to wait.
> Actually I don't see how I could apply the revert due to the regulatory
> problems explained by Jouni. We cannot break regulatory rules.
>  https://lore.kernel.org/ath10k/CANe27j+fur52HydqqzLc2hBV3QwC2La8+RTJcV=5W5LkUr=PqQ@mail.gmail.com/
Forgive me for insisting on this particular revert, but it still seems
to me that the premise of the original patch is not correct. I tried to
explain this in a reply to Jouni's message that you linked, but I
have not got a reply to that. Could you please clarify so that we can
settle the issue and clarify what users can do (if anything)?
As it stands there are multiple reports of regression on the mailing
list and only cursory discussion regarding the regulatory correctness of
the patch. In the absence of such correctness (which I am trying to
clarify) the regressions must surely be enough grounds for a revert?
As Brian mentioned in his revert patch the original problem was
resolved in firmware, and Wen has also agreed that the patch should
P.S. Sorry if the links in my mail are mangled - my employer's
mailserver tends to vandalise incoming/outgoing mail.
ath10k mailing list
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-04 12:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <0BEB3EB4-E3AF-4236-BACC-E42CE2D094B7@adcubum.com>
2020-12-22 3:42 ` [PATCH] ath: add support for special 0x0 regulatory domain Wen Gong
2020-12-22 18:30 ` Brian Norris
2020-12-23 11:01 ` Kalle Valo
2020-12-23 18:18 ` Brian Norris
2021-01-04 12:10 ` Alvin Šipraga [this message]
[not found] <firstname.lastname@example.org>
2019-12-02 10:08 ` Kalle Valo
[not found] ` <20191202100833.0C1B9C433CB@smtp.codeaurora.org>
2019-12-02 10:14 ` wgong
[not found] ` <email@example.com>
2019-12-02 10:24 ` Kalle Valo
2019-11-29 7:34 Wen Gong
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).