Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 21 Jul 2021 08:49:19 +0100
From:   Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>
To:     Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>
Cc:     gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, dan.carpenter@oracle.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
        fabioaiuto83@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] staging: rtl8188eu: move all source files from
 core subdirectory
Message-ID: <YPfRf8dgFd+u5hzm@equinox>
References: <20210719224601.255364-1-phil@philpotter.co.uk>
 <7bc43fb0-2dab-190b-c480-9e77cff863d4@lwfinger.net>
 <20210720090035.GB1406@agape.jhs>
 <08a8b372-8ec2-afcc-cc54-305d1dd74a59@lwfinger.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <08a8b372-8ec2-afcc-cc54-305d1dd74a59@lwfinger.net>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 07:22:26PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
> On 7/20/21 4:00 AM, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> > maybe the information we will need one day is:
> > 
> > will the core/-os_dep/-hal/-include/-directory-structure be
> > welcomed in mainline wireless subsystem, when an rtl* driver
> > will be perfectly tuned?
> > 
> > At the moment I can't see such a directory organization
> > in any of the realtek wireless driver.
> > 
> > Sure there's time for that;),
> 
> The question is how much lipstick do you want to put on that pig? The
> current version does not use cfg80211, and it does not work with
> NetworkManager or a modern hostapd to create an AP.
> 
> If you want to get the rtl8188eu driver in shape to be added to the regular
> drivers section, then I suggest you start with the v5.2.2.4 branch of
> https://github.com/lwfinger/rtl8188eu.git. Many users of the RTL8188EU chip
> use that driver. At least that version fixes the two problems listed above.
> If you want to flatten the directory structure, you can do it there and
> offline.
> 
> I want to caution you that following this path will take a lot of time, but
> once you get it into kernel shape, it will at least be useful. I have never
> had the time, nor the ambition to undertake this effort.
> 
> Larry
> 
Dear Larry,

Whilst I (and no doubt others) are happy to look into what you've
suggested, I do have a few questions:
(1) Why is the version from github not the one in staging?
(2) On a related note, working on it offline is difficult in terms of
proving contributions, particularly for a kernel mentee such as myself.

Might I suggest replacing this driver with the one you suggested
entirely, so work on it can continue in public? I am happy to submit
this and continue work if you think it would be viable. Many thanks and
I appreciate your thoughts on this.

Regards,
Phil