John W. Linville wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 11:33:01AM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
A typo in the specs interchanges the branches in an if statement, which
breaks operations for a BCM4306/rev 2 that has phy->analog == 1.
@@ -1895,7 +1895,7 @@ void bcm43xx_phy_set_baseband_attenuatio
bcm43xx_write16(dev, BCM43xx_MMIO_PHY0,
(bcm43xx_read16(dev, BCM43xx_MMIO_PHY0)
& 0xFFF0) | baseband_attenuation);
- } else if (phy->analog == 1) {
+ } else if (phy->analog != 1) {
bcm43xx_phy_write(dev, BCM43xx_PHY_DACCTL,
(bcm43xx_phy_read(dev, BCM43xx_PHY_DACCTL)
& 0xFFC3) | (baseband_attenuation << 2));
Larry,
How does this relate to the bcm43xx patch you asked me to revert
(and has been reverted in F-7)? That one change "==" to ">", while
this one changes "==" to "!=". Instead of reverting the other,
should it do the same thing as this?
It really doesn't matter whether one uses ">" or "!=" here. The number in question is >= 0 and the
test for for zero occurs earlier in the routine and ends with a return. Now that you mention it, it
would be best to make bcm43xx nad bcm43xx-mac80211 look the same. I'll modify and resubmit the patch.
Larry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
