Do you want the patch on top of target/linux/bcm53xx/patches-3.18/110-firmware-backport-NVRAM-driver.patch
Or on top of the unpatched drivers/firmware/broadcom/bcm47xx_nvram.c Or on top of the kernel driver file where 110-firmware....patch already has been applied? Or on top of the file target/linux/bcm53xx/files/drivers/firmware/Broadcom/bcm47xx_nvram.c The latter would be the easiest, but it probably breaks the 110 patch. In upstream kernels the bcm47xx_nvram is not part of the kernel, this made me believe that it was generated with a patch file. Didn’t realize that the OpenWRT also has a files directory from which the additional kernel drivers get "injected" in the kernel: target/linux/bcm53xx/files/drivers/firmware/broadcom Still this makes me believe they are openwrt specific kernel file, but I guess, that is just how one wants to read this sentence. -----Original Message----- On 23 April 2015 at 13:14, Hante Meuleman <meule...@broadcom.com> wrote: > Attached are > three files, one is from brcmfmac (firmware.c). This file is > added to demo how brcmfmac will use a new function of > bm47xx_nvram. The changes in this file are currently under > internal review and the patch may change, but it has been > tested and verified so it can be used to try it out. There exists a diff/patch format for a very good reason. Please send patches, so I can review your changes. > The other > two files bcm47xx_nvram.c and bcm47xx_nvram.h are > OpenWRT specific kernel files. Not really, they are part of the kernel. I was working for last few months moving them out of MIPS arch code. _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
