On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 23:14 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> If there
> were accessors for the skb data / len fields (like we do for mbufs)
> then porting the code would've involved about 5,000 less changed
> lines.
What generic mechanisms would you suggest to make
porting easier between bsd and linu
On 9 February 2017 at 23:03, Valo, Kalle wrote:
> Ben Greear writes:
>
>> On 02/07/2017 01:14 AM, Valo, Kalle wrote:
>>> Adrian Chadd writes:
>>>
Removing this method makes the diff to FreeBSD larger, as "vif" in
FreeBSD is a different pointer.
(Yes, I have ath10k on freebsd
Dear Ben,
According to your test result of QCA9880 3x3, what could be the low
performance issue at my side IPQ8064+QCA9880 with Ath10k? Is it really CPU
related problem on WPQ864?
thanks,
Phyuthe
-Original Message-
From: Ben Greear
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 4:24 AM
To: Sebas
Ben Greear writes:
> On 02/07/2017 01:14 AM, Valo, Kalle wrote:
>> Adrian Chadd writes:
>>
>>> Removing this method makes the diff to FreeBSD larger, as "vif" in
>>> FreeBSD is a different pointer.
>>>
>>> (Yes, I have ath10k on freebsd working and I'd like to find a way to
>>> reduce the diff m
Sebastian Gottschall writes:
> Am 07.02.2017 um 13:14 schrieb Valo, Kalle:
>> Ben Greear writes:
>>
>>> On 02/02/2017 10:42 AM, Sebastian Gottschall wrote:
Am 02.02.2017 um 19:24 schrieb Ben Greear:
> I hacked ath10k to enable radar detection on 160Mhz bandwidths. Now
> hostap
Heh, as a QSDK user, thankyou for fixing this!
-adrian
On 9 February 2017 at 02:26, wrote:
> On 2017-02-08 16:33, Sven Eckelmann wrote:
>>
>> Hi Anilkumar Kolli,
>>
>> we've noticed that your change in QSDK [1] removed the call to
>> ath10k_download_and_run_otp in ath10k_download_cal_data aft
On 2017-02-08 16:33, Sven Eckelmann wrote:
Hi Anilkumar Kolli,
we've noticed that your change in QSDK [1] removed the call to
ath10k_download_and_run_otp in ath10k_download_cal_data after the call
to
ath10k_core_get_board_id_from_otp. We reported [2] this to ath10k when
we
asked for some clari