[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200702091948.13296.mb@bu3sch.de>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 19:48:12 +0100
From: Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>
To: Larry Finger <larry.finger@...inger.net>
Cc: Joseph Jezak <josejx@...too.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
John Linville <linville@...driver.com>,
Bcm43xx-dev@...ts.berlios.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcm43xx: Fix code for spec changes of 2/7/2007
On Friday 09 February 2007 19:21, Larry Finger wrote:
> Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Friday 09 February 2007 23:22, Joseph Jezak wrote:
> >>> Well, I don't review the rest until you say to which specs you did the changes. ;)
> >> http://bcm-specs.sipsolutions.net/B5PHY
> >>
> >> Larry was working from the old specs, so when I updated it, I only
> >> updated the old specs. I'll fix the v4 specs soon.
> >
> > Ah, ok. I think we should decide on which specs carry most recent information.
> > I think v3 specs should be considered obsolete and new information/ fixes
> > should go into v4. It is already too confusing where to find newest information
> > to a certain thing.
> >
>
> I'll agree to that as long as there is a clear indication of any differences between V3 and V4 firmware.
Well, the difference between v3 and v4 is:
* The SHM API.
* v4 may include less BPHY stuff, as broadcom's v4 drivers don't include BHY anymore.
So I'd say for everything bug BPHY the v4 specs should be considered latest.
--
Greetings Michael.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists