In D48067#1098384, @adrian wrote:

In D48067#1097443, @bz wrote:

Given this is a RTWN_DPRINTF I don't see how that will help any reports.
But if you boot -v (bootverbose) you'll get reports like:

firmware: 'rtwn-rtl8821aufw' version 111: 27804 bytes loaded at 0xffffffff83878000

Is that helpful? Maybe we should add a if (bootverbose) to print this information like other drivers do?

Ah, yes. So, the firmware gets loaded when the NIC is brought up, so you CAN set a debug flag before you start wifi.

Honestly though, I think having the wifi firmware version and some basic NIC information available even without bootverbose would be good.

In D48152#1097986, @imp wrote:

I wonder if other SDHCI front ends need this?
Regardless, it certainly can't hurt.

In D47978#1097847, @adrian wrote:

It's in rtw88xx.c:rtw88xxa_tx_power_training(), line 1609 in my checkout.

Missed one but good apart from that; I'll trust you to fix this before commit. Thank you!

In D47978#1097594, @adrian wrote:

I'm talking with the rtw88 upstream maintainers on getting it fixed upstream too!

In D48057#1095687, @manu wrote:

In D48057#1095665, @lwhsu wrote:

Will we (or how about directly) move them to wifi-firmware- ports?

That's not my plan no, since we're moving toward pkgbase users will have a way to install them or not, moving them to ports gives us nothing.

Please ignore my ignorance but can you point me at the review which will actually make use of these? I am lost in the stack...

See comment on D48005

Given this is a RTWN_DPRINTF I don't see how that will help any reports.
But if you boot -v (bootverbose) you'll get reports like:

firmware: 'rtwn-rtl8821aufw' version 111: 27804 bytes loaded at 0xffffffff83878000

Is that helpful? Maybe we should add a if (bootverbose) to print this information like other drivers do?

Please use a Fixes: line in the commit message or similar whatever the template suggests for reverts.

Ignoring nose the rest seems fine, so fixing the mix between the two Dxxxx and we are good.

Commit message: "to aid" (without e; aide is a noun).

Should be fine; debugging only anyway..

I think at least r92eu_attach is lacking the default initialization?

"I think ..." doesn't sound like it needs to be a commit message but a personal note. Maybe update it before committing.

In D47942#1094368, @bofh wrote:

In D47942#1094365, @bz wrote:

@bofh are you going to commit this?

To be frank, although I wear a re@ hat, we have strict directives from @cperciva not to commit to /release without his approval. As he is in AWS REINVENT for now; I am not sure how this works. :(

@bofh are you going to commit this?

I tried to see if this is all I found in the header file; I wonder if we should also sort the header file to the same order so it's easier to see ;-)
Found one which I couldn't spot above.

I am still contemplating if we should simply put the cache-dir outside the

In D47860#1092750, @adrian wrote:

ugh somehow i missed the differential revision url in this when I landed it, sorry :(

In D47891#1092033, @adrian wrote:

is the intent to use it as a bitmask (eg ni_chw would be a combination of all currently supported bandwidths) ? Or just "only one width is set at once" ?

Of course. Sorry. Got you. We have nested if()s now and not && like in the original code for the checks.

Thanks a lot for all the patience and improvements. I like the changes of the last iteration!

(also dropped you an email which I had sent to re@) I think but firmware/fwget you covered the FreeBSD Foundation bits.

Likely fine but should make sure that all the different devices/firmware really can do that.

Likely fine. But likely also needs testing with a large variety of devices/firmware.