On Wed Dec 21 11, John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 4:52:04 pm Adrian Chadd wrote: > > Erm, why did you do this without first getting clearance from someone > > who has the hardware to test it? > > > > Just because it looks obviously wrong to you, doesn't at all mean that > > it's "wrong". It's quite possible that the driver _requires_ those > > bits to be written to the hardware as 0. > > > > > > I'd appreciate it if would please revert this and other ath/hal > > changes until I've had time to research them and test them out. > > I agree it should be reviewed, but if you are seriously depending on > the fact that the shifted values are beyond the edge of the word boundary > and so the result "wraps" to zero, then I'd question the sanity of your code.
i disagree. the commits should stay. after all this is HEAD. this way all developers running HEAD and with the appropriate ath hardware will test the changes. if dim@ really broke something, people will notice. the changes should *not* be MFC'ed. but if no one complains until 10.0-RELEASE, it's very unlikely he broke something. plus...does it make a different, if you test HEAD with the changes present or test HEAD with the changes integrated via patches? one way or the other you can test the changes and *if* something broke, the commits can be reverted. cheers. alex > > -- > John Baldwin _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
