On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 6:27:54 pm Alexander Best wrote: > 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.
You don't think changes should be reviewed (that's what I said above, I did not necessarily say it should be reverted)? That's way out in left field if that is what you really think. As for reverting the changes, I think they are small enough that is probably a bit overboard unless someone else reports an actual problem with them. (Specifically, I don't think the bar is high enough in this case to warrant a reversion.) However, I think that for future changes, Dimitry should get these sort of changes reviewed before committing them. -- 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"
