Hi! I'm a new user and I'm trying to document the Netgear EX6250v1 (wiki page ex7300_v2). I was wondering if it would be appropriate to document unofficial, unmerged patches, perhaps in the "Notes" section.
For context, the relevant patches for supporting 2.4GHz WiFi (ath9k QCN550x AHB support) never got upstreamed for various reasons, such as lack of reviews and testing on non-QCN550x platforms.
These patches were originally for an older OpenWRT version but with some elbow grease I reapplied them on top of 24.10.1 and they seem to work great. If it's appropriate, I'd like to link both the PR and my fork (or even just the updated .patch file, it's one commit really) for more adventurous people to try out.
The magic lever is mainline, once you get it in there, both a backports or just waiting (or just slightly nudging towards) an updated backports ('mac80211') package becomes an easy option. Maybe a gentle nudge for your patchset on linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org may get things moving again.
If you manage somewhat reduced patch, like device IDs and quirks minimally needed so that somebody else could reapply and fix up for next lts kernel.
Hi, I'm not sure I understand what you're proposing, sorry. The patch does not simply add some new ids. I already rebased it and I removed any newly unnecessary change, like already merged patches. If you meant something else please let me know.
The magic lever is mainline, once you get it in there, both a backports or just waiting (or just slightly nudging towards) an updated backports ('mac80211') package becomes an easy option.
Hi, that would be ideal yeah. I don't have too many hopes of seeing this patch upstreamed as the original author already tried getting reviewers and apparently failed. And this SoC is quite old at this point.
To be clear, I did not write those drivers and I take absolutely no credit. This great work comes from Wenli Looi. I can move around the Linux codebase somewhat but I don't have the skills to implement a mac80211 driver myself.
I could definitely try pinging them (edit: to be clear, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, not Wenli Looi) with a fresh reparented patchset though. Do you think that it would be ok to do that? I'm afraid that it would be considered rude, even with credit, especially since I don't have in-depth knowledge of this subsystem and thus would be of limited utility.
I'm really sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by "follow", what should I follow? I've never contributed to the Linux kernel before so I might be missing some terminology here, as I've only ever made local patches to it.
Should I send the reparented patchset to the Linux mailing list? Would that be ok, even if I'm not its original author?
