On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 02:59:31PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> arch/x86/include/asm/arch_hweight.h uses __sw_hweight{32,64} as
> alternatives, but they are implemented in arch/x86/lib/hweight.S
>
> x86 does not rely on the generic C implementation lib/hweight.c
> at all, so CONFIG_GENERIC_HWEI
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 09:20:46PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
> So Masahiro, could you hold your x86 patch for a while until the mt76
> patch will be in Linus' tree? That should not take more than two weeks,
> I think.
No hurry - I won't take it into the x86 now and queue it for 5.1 because
it is no
Hi,
so I'm seeing this when wlan0 tries to associate. On 4.6-rc2 + tip.
After that, wifi is dead in the water. Anyone have a clue?
And 4.5 seems fine, I'm typing from it as we speak.
...
[2.111418] iwlwifi :02:00.0: loaded firmware version 21.302800.0
op_mode iwlmvm
...
[2.220954] i
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 04:16:02AM +, Grumbach, Emmanuel wrote:
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/iwlwifi/backport-iwlwi
> fi.git/
It is very strange to pull from this repo, git fetch is doing something
for a while now without any forward progress.
In any case, 4.5 is bad too
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 09:41:41PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> If wireless maintainers think otherwise, I'll send a revert request to
> Linus for consideration.
I wonder if the reaction would be like this one:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/23/75
:-)
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fa
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 07:50:19AM +, Grumbach, Emmanuel wrote:
> Now - basically all your argument is on Johannes's comment:
> "deprecated enough". I think we have a chicken and egg problem here.
> We can't break things towards userland. Good. But we do want to
> deprecate this API because lot
On Thu, Jan 01, 2015 at 01:40:53AM +1100, Julian Calaby wrote:
> Sadly, nobody will read that. It needs to be at least an error,
> possibly with a big splat to scare people.
>
> Maybe using one of WARN()'s siblings instead.
And that opens a lot of useless bugzillas...
The right thing to do is go
On Thu, Jan 01, 2015 at 01:56:54AM +1100, Julian Calaby wrote:
> The point is that WEXT has been depreciated for _years_. Nobody
> seems to have listened. Yes, talking to maintainers will get the
> last holdouts of the "big" tools (e.g. wicd) to fix them, but it's
> not going to change all the peop
