Am 05.02.24 um 03:17 schrieb Ping-Ke Shih:
-----Original Message-----
From: Fiona Klute <fiona.klute@xxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, February 2, 2024 8:11 PM
To: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Pavel
Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>; Ondřej Jirman <megi@xxxxxx>; Fiona Klute <fiona.klute@xxxxxx>
Subject: [PATCH 2/9] wifi: rtw88: Debug output for rtw8723x EFUSE
Some 8703b chips contain invalid EFUSE data, getting detailed
information is critical when analyzing issues caused by that.
Signed-off-by: Fiona Klute <fiona.klute@xxxxxx>
---
The TX power table debug output function (rtw8723x_debug_txpwr_limit)
isn't specific to the chip family. Should I move it to debug.c
(e.g. as rtw_debug_txpwr_limit_2g)?
I think no need. My another thinking is to add an debugfs entry to read
these stuff out, but if failed to probe we can't get these information.
Okay, I'll leave it where it is then.
drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/rtw8723x.c | 159 ++++++++++++++++++
drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/rtw8723x.h | 11 ++
2 files changed, 170 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/rtw8723x.c
b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/rtw8723x.c
index 2b58064547..bca650c6bb 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/rtw8723x.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/rtw8723x.c
@@ -63,6 +63,163 @@ static void __rtw8723x_lck(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev)
rtw_write8(rtwdev, REG_TXPAUSE, 0x00);
}
+#define DBG_EFUSE_VAL(map, name) \
I think we should not hide 'rtwdev'
Okay, I'll change that.
+ rtw_dbg(rtwdev, RTW_DBG_EFUSE, # name "=0x%x\n", \
+ (map)->name)
+#define DBG_EFUSE_2BYTE(map, name) \
+ rtw_dbg(rtwdev, RTW_DBG_EFUSE, # name "=0x%x%x\n", \
Should format be '%02x%02x' for two bytes?
Right, otherwise the output could be ambiguous. I'll fix that.
+ (map)->name[0], (map)->name[1])
+
+static void rtw8723xe_efuse_debug(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,
+ struct rtw8723x_efuse *map)
+{
+ rtw_dbg(rtwdev, RTW_DBG_EFUSE, "mac_addr=%pM\n", map->e.mac_addr);
+ DBG_EFUSE_2BYTE(map, e.vendor_id);
+ DBG_EFUSE_2BYTE(map, e.device_id);
+ DBG_EFUSE_2BYTE(map, e.sub_vendor_id);
+ DBG_EFUSE_2BYTE(map, e.sub_device_id);
+}
+
+static void rtw8723xu_efuse_debug(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,
+ struct rtw8723x_efuse *map)
+{
+ DBG_EFUSE_2BYTE(map, u.vendor_id);
+ DBG_EFUSE_2BYTE(map, u.product_id);
+ DBG_EFUSE_VAL(map, u.usb_option);
+ rtw_dbg(rtwdev, RTW_DBG_EFUSE, "mac_addr=%pM\n", map->u.mac_addr);
Just curious why 'mac_addr' is the first one in rtw8723xe_efuse_debug(), but
the last one here?
I just followed the order of elements in the EFUSE data, as described in
the rtw8723x[eus]_efuse structs. I don't know why it is that way.
