2008-10-06 20:48:14

by Johannes Berg

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] p54: fix build failure

still HTML and as such not really useful.

However,


> +int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int
> len);

How about just killing the export instead? It isn't used anywhere else
anyway?

johannes


Attachments:
signature.asc (836.00 B)
This is a digitally signed message part

2008-10-07 12:34:14

by Johannes Berg

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] p54: fix build failure

Christian Lamparter wrote:
> if only kmail let me disable it! :-)
> Is it off now? If not, I'm really sorry, for all html ****.
> I'll fix it, but it'll take another while.

Seems to be ok now.

>> However,
>>
>> > +int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int
>> > len);
>>
>> How about just killing the export instead? It isn't used anywhere else
>> anyway?
>
> True.
>
> on the other hand: what about stlc45xx (p54spi)?
> These ?SoC? chips don't have any eeprom attached to the I2C, but they
> need calibration data and output power limits like the usb/pci parts as
> well.

Yeah, but it hardly matters now, we can always re-export it when needed.

johannes

2008-10-06 21:24:43

by Christian Lamparter

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] p54: fix build failure

On Monday 06 October 2008 22:47:45 Johannes Berg wrote:
> still HTML and as such not really useful.
>
if only kmail let me disable it! :-)
Is it off now? If not, I'm really sorry, for all html ****.
I'll fix it, but it'll take another while.

> However,
>
> > +int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int
> > len);
>
> How about just killing the export instead? It isn't used anywhere else
> anyway?

True.

on the other hand: what about stlc45xx (p54spi)?
These ?SoC? chips don't have any eeprom attached to the I2C, but they
need calibration data and output power limits like the usb/pci parts as well.

Regards,
Chr