Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 09/28] Remove ATHEROS_AR231X
2014-09-10 15:36 GMT+04:00, Jiri Slaby : > On 09/10/2014, 12:33 PM, Sergey Ryazanov wrote: >> 2014-09-09 22:27 GMT+04:00, John W. Linville : >>> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 04:02:10PM +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote: 2014-09-05 15:33 GMT+04:00 Paul Bolle : > Hi Sergey, > > On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 15:12 +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote: >> 2014-09-05 14:10 GMT+04:00, Paul Bolle : >>> On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 13:46 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: Having this conversation every rc1 is getting a bit silly. Could Jiri e.a. perhaps set some specific deadline for ATHEROS_AR231X to be submitted? >>> >>> I waited until rc3. Have you seen any activity on this front? If >>> not, >>> should I resend the patch that removes the code in mainline that >>> depends >>> on ATHEROS_AR231X (ie, AHB bus support)? >>> >> Recent activity always could be found in [1]. Now I finish another >> one >> round of cleanups and have a plan to fix several things (you can >> always find something that you really want to improve). But if you >> insist I could immediately switch to "send upstream" mode. And seems >> that this would be better approach. >> >> 1. https://dev.openwrt.org/log/trunk/target/linux/atheros > > And where can the related PULL requests or patch submissions be found? > I have not sent patches yet, since I thought that it would be easier to cleanup them in openwrt tree and then send them upstream. >>> >>> That excuse has worn a bit thin. Perhaps Paul should repost his >>> removal and you can add a revert to the start of your patch series? >>> >> As for me, I do not like such flapping > > Agreed in case what you have is in a good enough shape. You (and also > others) can still clean up the code in upstream too. So, if it is > mergeable, send it for upstream inclusion now, otherwise I am all for > John to apply the Paul's patch. Two days is the last deadline :) > The unused code has been a way too long > in the tree now. Code actively used in owrt firmware and its forks. -- BR, Sergey ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 09/28] Remove ATHEROS_AR231X
2014-09-09 22:27 GMT+04:00, John W. Linville : > On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 04:02:10PM +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote: >> 2014-09-05 15:33 GMT+04:00 Paul Bolle : >> > Hi Sergey, >> > >> > On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 15:12 +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote: >> >> 2014-09-05 14:10 GMT+04:00, Paul Bolle : >> >> > On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 13:46 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: >> >> >> Having this conversation every rc1 is getting a bit silly. Could >> >> >> Jiri >> >> >> e.a. perhaps set some specific deadline for ATHEROS_AR231X to be >> >> >> submitted? >> >> > >> >> > I waited until rc3. Have you seen any activity on this front? If >> >> > not, >> >> > should I resend the patch that removes the code in mainline that >> >> > depends >> >> > on ATHEROS_AR231X (ie, AHB bus support)? >> >> > >> >> Recent activity always could be found in [1]. Now I finish another one >> >> round of cleanups and have a plan to fix several things (you can >> >> always find something that you really want to improve). But if you >> >> insist I could immediately switch to "send upstream" mode. And seems >> >> that this would be better approach. >> >> >> >> 1. https://dev.openwrt.org/log/trunk/target/linux/atheros >> > >> > And where can the related PULL requests or patch submissions be found? >> > >> I have not sent patches yet, since I thought that it would be easier >> to cleanup them in openwrt tree and then send them upstream. > > That excuse has worn a bit thin. Perhaps Paul should repost his > removal and you can add a revert to the start of your patch series? > As for me, I do not like such flapping, but you have a final say in this discussion as a maintainer. -- BR, Sergey ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 09/28] Remove ATHEROS_AR231X
2014-09-05 15:33 GMT+04:00 Paul Bolle : > Hi Sergey, > > On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 15:12 +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote: >> 2014-09-05 14:10 GMT+04:00, Paul Bolle : >> > On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 13:46 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: >> >> Having this conversation every rc1 is getting a bit silly. Could Jiri >> >> e.a. perhaps set some specific deadline for ATHEROS_AR231X to be >> >> submitted? >> > >> > I waited until rc3. Have you seen any activity on this front? If not, >> > should I resend the patch that removes the code in mainline that depends >> > on ATHEROS_AR231X (ie, AHB bus support)? >> > >> Recent activity always could be found in [1]. Now I finish another one >> round of cleanups and have a plan to fix several things (you can >> always find something that you really want to improve). But if you >> insist I could immediately switch to "send upstream" mode. And seems >> that this would be better approach. >> >> 1. https://dev.openwrt.org/log/trunk/target/linux/atheros > > And where can the related PULL requests or patch submissions be found? > I have not sent patches yet, since I thought that it would be easier to cleanup them in openwrt tree and then send them upstream. -- BR, Sergey ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 09/28] Remove ATHEROS_AR231X
Hello Paul, 2014-09-05 14:10 GMT+04:00, Paul Bolle : > Jiri, Nick, Luis, John, > > On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 13:46 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: >> Having this conversation every rc1 is getting a bit silly. Could Jiri >> e.a. perhaps set some specific deadline for ATHEROS_AR231X to be >> submitted? > > I waited until rc3. Have you seen any activity on this front? If not, > should I resend the patch that removes the code in mainline that depends > on ATHEROS_AR231X (ie, AHB bus support)? > Recent activity always could be found in [1]. Now I finish another one round of cleanups and have a plan to fix several things (you can always find something that you really want to improve). But if you insist I could immediately switch to "send upstream" mode. And seems that this would be better approach. 1. https://dev.openwrt.org/log/trunk/target/linux/atheros -- BR, Sergey ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 09/28] Remove ATHEROS_AR231X
Hi Paul, 2014-06-18 14:25 GMT+04:00 Paul Bolle : > Jiri, Nick, Luis, John, > > On Wed, 2014-04-16 at 13:20 +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote: >> 2014-04-15 21:08 GMT+04:00 Paul Bolle : >> > On Thu, 2014-02-13 at 15:14 -0500, John W. Linville wrote: >> >> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 02:50:30PM +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote: >> >> > John, can you delay the merging of this patch for a few months, I will >> >> > try to prepare the necessary patches to add AR231x architecture to the >> >> > kernel and send them to linux-mips. >> >> >> >> OK -- looking forward to your patches. >> > >> > So am I. Is there any news on this front? >> > >> >> Work still in progress :( > > ATHEROS_AR231X and the things depending on it, like AHB bus support, > have been discussed for three years now. When will you (re)consider a > patch to remove all currently dead code? > > And to state the obvious: AHB bus support, and the other code depending > on ATHEROS_AR231X, can always be re-added once ATHEROS_AR231X gets added > to the tree. > Work in progress, I don't stop it. Just work is progressing slower than I had planned. I am already cleanup the code (mostly checkpatch errors and warnings) and send patches to OpenWRT tree. Further I plan to simplify initialization and I will be ready to send patches upstream. I need a couple of weeks for this. Is its reasonable time to not make a mess of remove/add commits? -- BR, Sergey ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 09/28] Remove ATHEROS_AR231X
2014-04-15 21:08 GMT+04:00 Paul Bolle : > On Thu, 2014-02-13 at 15:14 -0500, John W. Linville wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 02:50:30PM +0400, Sergey Ryazanov wrote: >> > John, can you delay the merging of this patch for a few months, I will >> > try to prepare the necessary patches to add AR231x architecture to the >> > kernel and send them to linux-mips. >> >> OK -- looking forward to your patches. > > So am I. Is there any news on this front? > Work still in progress :( -- BR, Sergey ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 09/28] Remove ATHEROS_AR231X
2014-02-11 3:43 GMT+04:00 Sergey Ryazanov : > 2014-02-11 2:37 GMT+04:00 Florian Fainelli : >> 2014-02-10 4:38 GMT-08:00 Sergey Ryazanov : >>> 2014-02-10 16:17 GMT+04:00 Oleksij Rempel : Am 10.02.2014 13:05, schrieb Sergey Ryazanov: > 2014-02-10 0:03 GMT+04:00 Richard Weinberger : >> Am 09.02.2014 20:18, schrieb Hauke Mehrtens: >>> On 02/09/2014 07:47 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: The symbol is an orphan, get rid of it. Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger --- drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath5k/Kconfig | 10 +- drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath5k/ath5k.h | 28 drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath5k/base.c | 14 -- drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath5k/led.c | 7 --- 4 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) >>> >>> This code is used in OpenWrt with an out of tree arch code for the >>> Atheros 231x/531x SoC. [0] I do not think anyone is working on adding >>> this code to mainline Linux kernel, because of lack of time/interest. >> >> Sorry, we don't maintain out of tree code. >> > > Oleksij, Jonathan do you still working to make ar231x devices work > with upstream, since your posts [1, 2]? Or may be someone from OpenWRT > team would like to add upstream support? > > 1. https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/13/321 > 2. https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/13/358 > Hi, my current target was to provide barebox and openocd support. - ar2313 is already upstream on barebox. - ar2315-2318 (barebox) awaiting review by Anthony Pavlov. - openocd (EJTAG) support is ready and i'll push it ASUP. >>> WOW, Impressive. >> >> That's a nice toy project, although since there are is an existing >> bootloader with sources, I would have shifted the priority towards >> getting the kernel support merged such that the bootloader can be used >> for something. BTW I sent a few devices to Jonathan, not sure if he >> ever got those... >> >>> I hope Jonathan do kernel part. If not, i can provide some work, since i have testing boards and expiriance on this hardware. >>> If you need, I can test kernel part, or even do some porting work. I >>> have some AR231x based boards, e.g. Ubnt LS2 and NS2. >> >> I guess you could start splitting the OpenWrt patches into a format >> that makes them suitable for being merged upstream and starting with >> the MIPS parts. There might be a bunch of checkpatch.pl cleanup work >> to do before getting those submitted. > > I will do that if Jonathan does not have a working solution, which he > would like to push upstream. So, let's wait for his reply. > John, can you delay the merging of this patch for a few months, I will try to prepare the necessary patches to add AR231x architecture to the kernel and send them to linux-mips. -- BR, Sergey ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
