Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 08/31/2015 06:43 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> On 08/30/2015 09:39 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>>>> Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>> On 08/30/2015 01:41 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>>>>>>>> +{USB_DEVICE_AND_INTERFACE_INFO(USB_VENDOR_ID_REALTEK, 0x817e, 0xff,
>>>>>>> 0xff, 0xff),
>>>>>>>> + .driver_info = (unsigned long)&rtl8192cu_fops},
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have tested a device with USB ID 0x0bda (USB_VENDOR_ID_REALTEK):0x817e.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Were you happy with the results, or did it cause problems? Ie. did you
>>>>>> try on x86 or on PPC32?
>>>>>
>>>>> As covered in the other mail, it works very well at G rates.
>>>>
>>>> I see - I am a little confused, it works well on G rates but not on N
>>>> rates, or was this due to the AP used?
>>>
>>> The AP is AC1200. It supports full N rates on other devices.
>>
>> You only manage to make it work on G rates against this AP? Urgh, I
>> don't like that at all.
>>
>> I thought you reported 30+Mbps performances though?, thats more than you
>> get on G.
>
> OK, I get a bit better than the top G rate of 27 Mbps, but the
> connection reports a 54 Mbps raw rate. My Intel 7260 gets RX of 95 and
> TX of 53 Mbps from the same location relative to the AP. For the
> Intel, the listed raw rate is 300 Mbps.
It's possible the connection reporting I am doing is wrong. I haven't
figured out how to report the actual transmission speed, which is what
the mac80211 stack wants. Some of the other drivers fake it or repor RX
speeds, but that isn't what one is meant to report.
>>> A full debug=0x3fff showed me one problem on the PPC. I will be
>>> testing a patch later today.
>>
>> Interesting, let me know what you find.
>
> Thanks for the fixes. I'm still getting the sleeping while atomic BUG
> splat from rtl8723a_h2c_cmd+0x48. Today I know that is not a lock
> dependency issue. I have one in VirtualBox that fires and disables
> further checking, but that driver is not loading now.
This is bothersome, I'll have to dig futher into this.
> I have made some progress on the big-endian issues. When the firmware
> file is read from disk, the first byte read must be the first byte
> written to the device. In the slow write N routine, four bytes are
> picked and written using the write32 routine, which does a cpu_to_32()
> byte swap. As a result, the order of bytes to the device is 03, 02,
> 01, 00! Rather than byte swap twice, I am calling the regular writeN
> routine with each hunk. After a bit of thinking about the best
> blocksize to use, I settled on 64. That reduces the number of
> full-size hunks that are written without unduly increasing the
> worst-case number of writes needed for the remainder.
>
> On PPC, I now get a device registered; however, the scan data are
> garbled. That shouldn't be too difficult to debug, but just in case, I
> have attached the patch for rtl8xxxu_slow_writeN().
As I mentioned in a direct email - calling writeN from slow_writeN is
not a solution. I found some devices fail if you try to use the fast
writeN routine. Maybe rtl8xxxu_raw_write32() - without the byteswap
would be a better approach, or simply putting the relevant code into the
slow_writeN function.
I am flying back to New York tomorrow, and I'll have some time on the
plane, so I'll try to have a look at that.
Cheers,
Jes
--
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
