so' ; 'Mathias Kresin'
> ; 'Birger Koblitz'
> Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2] ath79: use gpio_hog instead of
> gpio-export
>
> Hi Adrian,
>
> Sorry for a late reply.
>
> On 06.11.2019 16:47, Adrian Schmutzler wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> Wouldn't i
Hi Adrian,
Sorry for a late reply.
On 06.11.2019 16:47, Adrian Schmutzler wrote:
Hi,
Wouldn't it make more sense to spend time now on implementing
future-proof solution and switch to it when it's ready?
Obviously, yes. But for the meantime, I'd like to have a less-arbitrary status
quo.
Hi,
> Wouldn't it make more sense to spend time now on implementing
> future-proof solution and switch to it when it's ready?
Obviously, yes. But for the meantime, I'd like to have a less-arbitrary status
quo.
> I believe the major issue here is that there is no 'in place'
> replacement for
writes:
> Well, normally I'd say to lower the TX power you would use the
> user-space txpower setting and not change voltages of an amplifier.
This choice will affect S/N. You'll probably limit the usable txpower
range this way.
Please use the features of the hardware. Don't hide them.
writes:
> I'm not really convinced that resetting an USB device by toggling its
> power really is a feature, and not just a workaround for a faulty USB
> device.
A workaround for a faulty USB device *is* a feature :-)
This feature is very important to at least one group of users, as Enrico
Hi Adrian,
On 06.11.2019 00:14, m...@adrianschmutzler.de wrote:
Hi,
TL;DR:
1. We should find an agreement that can be used coherently at least for new
device support submissions.
I believe the major issue here is that there is no 'in place'
replacement for 'gpio-export' (or I'm just not
On 11/5/19 11:01 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
"Adrian Schmutzler" writes:
But, based on the discussion here, the opposite has been identified as
superior solution (discussing nand subtarget):
https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/2184#discussion_r342136635
That's missing the point. Regulators
Hi,
TL;DR:
1. We should find an agreement that can be used coherently at least for new
device support submissions.
2. Everyone (and particular committers) feel invited to add your view.
> > I've just had a look at the openmesh_om5p-ac-v2, and it seems as if the
> gpio-exports there are just
e gpio_hog instead of
gpio-export
Hi,
-Original Message-
From: Enrico Mioso [mailto:mrkiko...@gmail.com]
Sent: Dienstag, 5. November 2019 23:07
To: Adrian Schmutzler
Cc: Bjørn Mork ; openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org; Birger
Koblitz
Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2] ath79: us
Subject: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2] ath79: use gpio_hog instead of gpio-
export
From: Birger Koblitz
The gpio-export functionality is a hack for missing kernel functionality, which
was rejected in upstream kernel long time ago, for details see this email
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Enrico Mioso [mailto:mrkiko...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Dienstag, 5. November 2019 23:07
> To: Adrian Schmutzler
> Cc: Bjørn Mork ; openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org; Birger
> Koblitz
> Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2] ath79:
[mailto:openwrt-devel-boun...@lists.openwrt.org] On
>> Behalf Of Bjørn Mork
>> Sent: Dienstag, 5. November 2019 17:38
>> To: Adrian Schmutzler
>> Cc: openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org; Birger Koblitz
>> Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2] ath79: use gpio_hog in
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: openwrt-devel [mailto:openwrt-devel-boun...@lists.openwrt.org]
> On Behalf Of Adrian Schmutzler
> Sent: Dienstag, 5. November 2019 16:12
> To: openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
> Cc: Birger Koblitz
> Subject: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2
"Adrian Schmutzler" writes:
> So, for the moment I think the gpio-hog is an improvement over gpio-export.
Agreed 100%
Bjørn
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Bjørn Mork [mailto:bj...@mork.no]
> Sent: Dienstag, 5. November 2019 20:01
> To: Adrian Schmutzler
> Cc: openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org; 'Birger Koblitz'
> Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2] ath79: use gpio_hog instead
"Adrian Schmutzler" writes:
> But, based on the discussion here, the opposite has been identified as
> superior solution (discussing nand subtarget):
> https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/2184#discussion_r342136635
That's missing the point. Regulators are superior if there is
controlling
nWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2] ath79: use gpio_hog instead of gpio-
> export
>
> Adrian Schmutzler writes:
>
> > This patch converts all DTS files with settings that normally do
> > not need user interaction, e.g. power for external USB ports, to
> > gpio_hog.
>
> Wouldn't
Adrian Schmutzler writes:
> This patch converts all DTS files with settings that normally do
> not need user interaction, e.g. power for external USB ports, to
> gpio_hog.
Wouldn't it be better to map these as fixed regulators? Then you could
eventually link them to the connected
Thanks Adrian for taking this up again!
Birger
On 5 November 2019 16:12:02 CET, Adrian Schmutzler
wrote:
>From: Birger Koblitz
>
>The gpio-export functionality is a hack for missing kernel
>functionality, which was rejected in upstream kernel long time ago,
>for details see this email
From: Birger Koblitz
The gpio-export functionality is a hack for missing kernel
functionality, which was rejected in upstream kernel long time ago,
for details see this email
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2019-February/015772.html,
discussion in PR#1366 or
20 matches
Mail list logo
