mbox series

[v13,0/2] Bluetooth: hci_qca: Add support for Qualcomm Bluetooth SoC QCA2066

Message ID 20230727044011.965205-1-quic_tjiang@quicinc.com (mailing list archive)
Headers show
Series Bluetooth: hci_qca: Add support for Qualcomm Bluetooth SoC QCA2066 | expand

Message

Tim Jiang July 27, 2023, 4:40 a.m. UTC 
This series adds support for qualcomm bluetooth soc qca2066

Changes in v13
 - change the subject name for patch 1/2
 - solve review comments for patch 2/2

Changes in v12
 - fix compile error issue for patch 1/2

Changes in v11
 - reverse two patches order

Changes in v10
 - break out btsoc type print into seperate patch

Changes in v2-v9
 - solve review comments for code style and commit message context


Tim Jiang (2):
  Bluetooth: hci_qca: adjust qca btsoc type print expression
  Bluetooth: hci_qca: Add support for Qualcomm Bluetooth SoC QCA2066

 drivers/bluetooth/btqca.c   | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 drivers/bluetooth/btqca.h   |  4 +-
 drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++--
 3 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

Comments

Johan Hovold July 27, 2023, 7:25 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 12:40:09PM +0800, Tim Jiang wrote:
> This series adds support for qualcomm bluetooth soc qca2066
> 
> Changes in v13
>  - change the subject name for patch 1/2
>  - solve review comments for patch 2/2

Again, this is not specific enough and essentially only explains why you
changed something, but doesn't say what you changed.

You also again ignored some of my review comments without even
explaining why.

Seriously, you Qualcomm engineers really need to get your act together
and stop wasting other people's time.

Johan
Tim Jiang July 27, 2023, 7:54 a.m. UTC | #2 
On 7/27/23 15:25, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 12:40:09PM +0800, Tim Jiang wrote:
>> This series adds support for qualcomm bluetooth soc qca2066
>>
>> Changes in v13
>>   - change the subject name for patch 1/2
>>   - solve review comments for patch 2/2
> Again, this is not specific enough and essentially only explains why you
> changed something, but doesn't say what you changed.
>
> You also again ignored some of my review comments without even
> explaining why.

[Tim] sorry for that , seems the email I explain why we do not need to 
sort the btsoc name does not be sent out for network issue.

as qc define btsoc name does not be sorted  alphabetilly, and we add new 
chip name followed by old one , I think we only under this rule is OK,  
do you agree?  thank you very much.

>
> Seriously, you Qualcomm engineers really need to get your act together
> and stop wasting other people's time.
>
> Johan