Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230108211324.442823-1-martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230108211324.442823-1-martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
From:   Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Jan 2023 22:30:23 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFBinCCD9mK5_LNRh3aj5sTHOZFfMTbF1zaxCMM8YaqZdKdYhg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] wifi: rtw88: Three locking fixes for existing code
To:     kvalo@kernel.org
Cc:     linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, tony0620emma@gmail.com,
        pkshih@realtek.com, s.hauer@pengutronix.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Kalle,

On Sun, Jan 8, 2023 at 10:13 PM Martin Blumenstingl
<martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> This series consists of three patches which are fixing existing
> behavior (meaning: it either affects PCIe or USB or both) in the rtw88
> driver.
In reply to an earlier version of this series you wrote [0]:
> BTW wireless-next or wireless-testing are the preferred baselines for
> wireless patches. Of course you can use other trees if you really want,
> but please try to make sure they apply to wireless-next. Conflicts are
> always extra churn I would prefer to avoid.
Noted.
Additionally I just tested it and can confirm that these patches apply
fine (without any fuzz) on top of the wireless tree.


Best regards,
Martin


[0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/87mt6qfvb1.fsf@kernel.org/