Michal Kazior <michal.kaz...@tieto.com> writes:
> On 22/04/13 10:08, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Michal Kazior <michal.kaz...@tieto.com> writes:
>>
>>> Since we have data_lock it is no longer necessary
>>> to have scan.lock.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Kazior <michal.kaz...@tieto.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> ret = ath10k_wmi_stop_scan(ar, &arg);
>>> if (ret)
>>> ath10k_warn("%s: ath10k_wmi_stop_scan failed (%d)\n", __func__,
>>> ret);
>>>
>>> + ath10k_wmi_flush_tx(ar);
>>
>> Is this by accident?
>
> Oh. I noticed we were missing it. Must've mixed it into the patch.
> Should I resend the patches split?
Yes, please split patch 2. That makes it easier to bisect etc. And
please note that I have already applied patch 1.
But please wait an hour or two so that I have gone through my patch
backlog. Less conflicts that way.
--
Kalle Valo
_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
