Hi, I like Dmitry's approach as it will reduce duplicate code.
I would be happy to send patches for the "rest" (what I did more than him) based on his patch. I just interpreted the comment > The only problem here is that not all platforms need it. as an objection to the unified approach, so I sent my patches representing a "smaller" change. Best Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: openwrt-devel [mailto:openwrt-devel-boun...@lists.openwrt.org] On > Behalf Of Christian Lamparter > Sent: Montag, 25. Februar 2019 18:28 > To: openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > Cc: Dmitry Tunin <hanipouspi...@gmail.com>; Adrian Schmutzler > <freif...@adrianschmutzler.de> > Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] Speed up caldata/eeprom > handling for ar71xx/ath79 > > Hello, > > On Friday, February 22, 2019 7:52:37 PM CET Dmitry Tunin wrote: > > пт, 22 февр. 2019 г. в 21:48, Adrian Schmutzler > <freif...@adrianschmutzler.de>: > > > > > > Based on the ipq40xx commit from chunkeey, I tried to do the same for > > > ar71xx/ath79. > > > > > I want to add that without this patch firmware extraction is not fast > > enough to get it in time after a flash. That's why wireless needs a > > restart. > > I have a question for you too. There are currently two competing patches > for the ath79 10-ath9k-eeprom extraction: > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1046790/ > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1047062/ > > Now, Dmitry' was faster with his version, but Adrian's version > patches everything so which one should it be? > > (I'll write some more about the future of the extraction in the > other thread). > > Cheers > Christian > > > > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
pgpaIVNcPLQf2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
