Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless+bounces-6752-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Message-ID: <cf025908-8e88-f60c-6466-9fdf1bccff09@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 10:17:03 +0530
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] wifi: ath12k: Introduce device group abstraction
Content-Language: en-US
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>, Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@quicinc.com>
CC: <ath12k@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20240420083750.1545670-1-quic_hprem@quicinc.com>
 <878r14v2o4.fsf@kernel.org>
 <57002bbf-2c85-4fa7-b249-4bd3f2ba1bcf@quicinc.com>
 <8734rbidcg.fsf@kernel.org>
From: Harshitha Prem <quic_hprem@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <8734rbidcg.fsf@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


On 4/24/2024 10:09 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@quicinc.com> writes:
> 
>>>> Depends-on:
>>>>          [PATCH 0/3] wifi: ath12k: Refactor the hardware recovery
>>>> procedures
>>>
>>> Are you referring to this patchset:
>>>
>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/?series=821155&state=*&order=date
>>>
>>> That was sent three months ago and at least I couldn't find a newer
>>> version. So I'll just drop this patchset for now without even looking at
>>> it.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I'm stumped as well. the patch specifies:
>>> base-commit: c416602943dd36fbd13af7496430723935c867a3
>>> prerequisite-patch-id: a4d62344b11368fb7e549c03b6a31f7ba4c9e2bb
>>> prerequisite-patch-id: b4a1e18a85d8c1e337fa133c2bd2956c33b11046
>>> prerequisite-patch-id: b16edd310baa35e2500267e338f60c9a2e6594e1
>>
>> but lore is unable to find those prerequisite patch-ids, which leads me to
>> believe that they were rebased internally but never posted.
>>
>> I tried to apply the January series on top of the base-commit:
>> c416602943dd36fbd13af7496430723935c867a3 but it doesn't apply cleanly.
>>
>> So I think we need to have a rebased and updated "Refactor the hardware
>> recovery procedures" first.
> 
> Yeah, it's waste of everyone's time to submit patches like this which
> don't even apply at all due to missing dependencies. Please don't do
> that.
> 
Sure. Sorry Jeff and Kalle, My bad!. yes,the dependent patch should be 
rebased. Will respawn this series after the dependencies are at the latest.

Thanks,
Harshitha