[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9f2760f9-5778-b600-0709-a354062c677d@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 11:00:04 +0700
From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Meng Tang <tangmeng@...ontech.com>
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, tony0620emma@...il.com,
kvalo@...eaurora.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Guo-Feng Fan <vincent_fann@...ltek.com>,
Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>,
Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 1/3] commit 5d6651fe8583 ("rtw88: 8821c: support RFE
type2 wifi NIC")
On 6/28/22 21:37, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 04:37:24PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 09:30:44PM +0800, Meng Tang wrote:
>>> From: Guo-Feng Fan <vincent_fann@...ltek.com>
>>>
>>> RFE type2 is a new NIC which has one RF antenna shares with BT.
>>> Update phy parameter to verstion V57 to allow initial procedure
>>> to load extra AGC table for sharing antenna NIC.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Guo-Feng Fan <vincent_fann@...ltek.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>
>>> Tested-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210202055012.8296-4-pkshih@realtek.com
>>> Signed-off-by: Meng Tang <tangmeng@...ontech.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c | 2 +
>>> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.h | 7 +
>>> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/rtw8821c.c | 47 +++
>>> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/rtw8821c.h | 14 +
>>> .../wireless/realtek/rtw88/rtw8821c_table.c | 397 ++++++++++++++++++
>>> .../wireless/realtek/rtw88/rtw8821c_table.h | 1 +
>>> 6 files changed, 468 insertions(+)
>>>
>>
>> <formletter>
>>
>> This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
>> stable kernel tree. Please read:
>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
>> for how to do this properly.
>>
>> </formletter>
>
> Sorry, no, this is all good, my fault.
Hi Greg,
The problem here is patch title. If this is indeed a backport, the patch
title should be same as in the mainline. Also, mainline (upstream)
commit should be noted in the backport.
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
Powered by blists - more mailing lists