Sorry, try the patch. AR5416 will invoke ath9k_hw_gpio_get() before gpio initialized correctly. Thanks, Miaoqing ________________________________________ From: Valo, Kalle Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 9:54 PM To: Stefan Lippers-Hollmann; miaoqing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ath9k-devel; sudipm.mukherjee@xxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: fix GPIO mask for AR9462 and AR9565 Stefan Lippers-Hollmann <s.l-h@xxxxxx> writes: > Hi > > On 2016-06-03, miaoqing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> From: Miaoqing Pan <miaoqing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> The incorrect GPIO mask cause kernel warning, when AR9462 access GPIO11. >> Also fix the mask for AR9565. > [...] > > I think I'm seeing a very similar issue on AR5008/ AR5416+AR2133 and > 4.7-rc7 (mainline v4.7-rc7-92-g47ef4ad, to be exact). > > [ 4.958874] ath9k 0000:02:02.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) > [...] > [ 5.401086] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 5.401093] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 1159 at /build/linux-aptosid-4.7~rc7/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c:2776 ath9k_hw_gpio_get+0x148/0x1a0 [ath9k_hw] [...] > Reverting this, and the other patches depending on it, fixes the > problem for me: > > e024111f6946f45cf1559a8c6fd48d2d0f696d07 Revert "ath9k: fix GPIO mask for AR9462 and AR9565" > db2221901fbded787daed153281ed875de489692 Revert "ath9k: free GPIO resource for SOC GPIOs" > c7212b7136ba69efb9785df68b669381cb893920 Revert "ath9k: fix BTCoex configuration for SOC chips" > dfcf02cd2998e2240b2bc7b4f4412578b8070bdb Revert "ath9k: fix BTCoex access invalid registers for SOC chips" > 668ae0a3e48ac6811f431915b466514bf167e2f4 Revert "ath9k: add bits definition of BTCoex MODE2/3 for SOC chips" > c8770bcf5cefa8cbfae21c07c4fe3428f5a9d42a Revert "ath9k: Allow platform override BTCoex pin" > 79d4db1214a0c7b1818aaf64d0606b17ff1acea7 Revert "ath9k: cleanup led_pin initial" > b2d70d4944c1789bc64376ad97a811f37e230c87 Revert "ath9k: make GPIO API to support both of WMAC and SOC" > a01ab81b09c55025365c1de1345b941a18e05529 Revert "ath9k: define correct GPIO numbers and bits mask" > > AR9285 (168c:002b) is fine either way. Miaoqing, have you looked at this? Looks like another regression which should be fixed. -- Kalle Valo
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c @@ -2482,6 +2482,8 @@ int ath9k_hw_fill_cap_info(struct ath_hw *ah) return -EINVAL; } + ath9k_gpio_cap_init(ah); + if (AR_SREV_9485(ah) || AR_SREV_9285(ah) || AR_SREV_9330(ah) || @@ -2531,8 +2533,6 @@ int ath9k_hw_fill_cap_info(struct ath_hw *ah) else pCap->hw_caps &= ~ATH9K_HW_CAP_HT; - ath9k_gpio_cap_init(ah); - if (AR_SREV_9160_10_OR_LATER(ah) || AR_SREV_9100(ah)) pCap->rts_aggr_limit = ATH_AMPDU_LIMIT_MAX; else
