linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ath10k: add option for chip-id based BDF selection

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]

Message-Id: <20201106071107.D7CE3C433C6@smtp.codeaurora.org>
Date:   Fri,  6 Nov 2020 07:11:07 +0000 (UTC)
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To:     Abhishek Kumar <kuabhs@...omium.org>
Cc:     ath10k@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, kuabhs@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: add option for chip-id based BDF selection

Abhishek Kumar <kuabhs@...omium.org> wrote:

> In some devices difference in chip-id should be enough to pick
> the right BDF. Add another support for chip-id based BDF selection.
> With this new option, ath10k supports 2 fallback options.
> 
> The board name with chip-id as option looks as follows
> board name 'bus=snoc,qmi-board-id=ff,qmi-chip-id=320'
> 
> Signed-off-by: Abhishek Kumar <kuabhs@...omium.org>
> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
> Tested-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
> Tested-by: Abhishek Kumar <kuabhs@...omium.org>

There were few checkpatch warnings which I fixed:

$ ath10k-check
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/core.c:1501: Alignment should match open parenthesis
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/core.c:1512: line length of 92 exceeds 90 columns
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/core.c:1521: line length of 92 exceeds 90 columns

The first one was also what Doug commented. I also added Tested-on tags,
thanks for those. The updated patch is in pending branch (soon).

But is this patch ok to take now? I didn't quite get the conclusion of the
discussion.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/20201020000506.1.Ifbc28707942179f1cefc7491e995814564495270@changeid/

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