Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:2104 "EHLO wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750868AbcJFHn4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2016 03:43:56 -0400 From: "Valo, Kalle" To: Marty Faltesek CC: "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: cache calibration data when the core is stopped. Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 07:40:48 +0000 Message-ID: <87r37ukjr5.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (sfid-20161006_094400_006267_105B0379) References: <1473801118-103112-1-git-send-email-mfaltesek@google.com> <87fuodswlu.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> In-Reply-To: (Marty Faltesek's message of "Wed, 5 Oct 2016 12:39:48 -0400") Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Marty Faltesek writes: > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 3:46 AM, Valo, Kalle wrot= e: >> Marty Faltesek writes: >> >>> Caching calibration data allows it to be accessed when the >>> device is not active. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marty Faltesek >> >> No comma in the title, please. >> >> What tree did you use as the baseline? This doesn't seem to apply to >> ath.git: > > We use backports 20160122 which has not been updated since earlier this y= ear. > I can forward port it to your tree, and make sure > it builds but won't be able to test it. Will that be OK? Sure, I can test it. >> Also please note that this patch (which I'm queuing to 4.9) touches the >> same area: >> >> ath10k: fix debug cal data file >> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9340953/ > > I've modified this too, and this won't be necessary, so can you drop > it? If not, let me know and I'll pull it in and make sure I'm based > off it too. Actually I was first planning to push 9340953 to 4.9 and take your patch to 4.10. But your patch is a cleaner approach to this and maybe I should push that to 4.9 instead? Need to think a bit more. --=20 Kalle Valo=