netdev - Re: ath9k gpio request

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 05 Jun 2016 23:10:25 +0530
From:	Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
To:	Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
	"Pan, Miaoqing" <miaoqing@....qualcomm.com>
CC:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	ath9k-devel <ath9k-devel@...lcomm.com>,
	"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	"ath9k-devel@...ts.ath9k.org" <ath9k-devel@...ts.ath9k.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Miaoqing Pan <miaoqing@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: ath9k gpio request

On Saturday 04 June 2016 08:07 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> (Fixing top posting)
>
> "Pan, Miaoqing" <miaoqing@....qualcomm.com> writes:
>
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/reg.h
>>>> @@ -1122,8 +1122,8 @@ enum {
>>>>    #define AR9300_NUM_GPIO                          16
>>>>    #define AR9330_NUM_GPIO                                 16
>>>>    #define AR9340_NUM_GPIO                                 23
>>>> -#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO                                 10
>>>> -#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO                                 12
>>>> +#define AR9462_NUM_GPIO                                 14
>>>> +#define AR9485_NUM_GPIO                                 11
>>>>    #define AR9531_NUM_GPIO                                 18
>>>>    #define AR9550_NUM_GPIO                                 24
>>>>    #define AR9561_NUM_GPIO                                 23
>>>> @@ -1139,8 +1139,8 @@ enum {
>>>>    #define AR9300_GPIO_MASK                        0x0000F4FF
>>>>    #define AR9330_GPIO_MASK                        0x0000F4FF
>>>>    #define AR9340_GPIO_MASK                        0x0000000F
>>>> -#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK                        0x000003FF
>>>> -#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK                        0x00000FFF
>>>> +#define AR9462_GPIO_MASK                        0x00003FFF
>>>> +#define AR9485_GPIO_MASK                        0x000007FF
>>>>    #define AR9531_GPIO_MASK                        0x0000000F
>>>>    #define AR9550_GPIO_MASK                        0x0000000F
>>>>    #define AR9561_GPIO_MASK                        0x0000000F
>>>
>>> solves the problem.
>>>
>>> Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@...ethink.co.uk>
>>
>> Done, https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9151847/
>
> But the patch 9151847 is different from what Sudip tested above? Why?
>
> And if you modify something _after_ the reporter has tested the patch
> clearly document what you changed and why. I do not want find hidden
> changes like this, even more so when the patch is going to a 4.7-rc
> release.
>
> Sudip, could you also test patch 9151847, please? You can download the
> patch from the patchwork link above.

This is also ok. Please add my
Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@...ethink.co.uk>

and maybe a Reported-by tag is also appropriate in this case.


Regards
Sudip