> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bitterblue Smith <rtl8821cerfe2@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 9:47 PM
> To: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [PATCH v2] wifi: rtlwifi: rtl_usb: Use sync register writes
>
> Currently rtl_usb performs register writes using the async
> usb_submit_urb() function. This appears to work fine for the RTL8192CU,
> but the RTL8192DU (soon to be supported by rtlwifi) has a problem:
> it transmits everything at the 1M rate in the 2.4 GHz band. (The 5 GHz
> band is still untested.)
>
> With this patch, rtl_usb performs the register writes using the
> synchronous usb_control_msg() function, and the RTL8192DU works
> normally. The RTL8192CU still works.
>
> The vendor drivers use the async writes in only one function,
> rtl8192du_trigger_gpio_0 / rtl8192cu_trigger_gpio_0, which probably
> doesn't even run in real life. They use sync writes everywhere else.
>
> Also, remove "sync" and "async" from the names of the members of
> struct rtl_io to avoid confusion:
>
> write{8,16,32}_async -> write{8,16,32}
> read{8,16,32}_sync -> read{8,16,32}
>
> Signed-off-by: Bitterblue Smith <rtl8821cerfe2@xxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v2:
> - Rename the members of struct rtl_io.
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c | 12 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/usb.c | 163 ++++++--------------
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/wifi.h | 30 ++--
> 3 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 139 deletions(-)
>
[...]
> @@ -114,18 +51,15 @@ static int _usbctrl_vendorreq_sync_read(struct usb_device *udev, u8 request,
> } while (++vendorreq_times < MAX_USBCTRL_VENDORREQ_TIMES);
>
> if (status < 0 && count++ < 4)
> - pr_err("reg 0x%x, usbctrl_vendorreq TimeOut! status:0x%x value=0x%x\n",
> - value, status, *(u32 *)pdata);
> - return status;
> + pr_err("reg 0x%x, usbctrl_vendorreq TimeOut! status:0x%x value=0x%x reqtype=0x%x\n",
nit: Since you touch this, would you like to use dev_err() instead?
> + value, status, *(u32 *)pdata, reqtype);
> }
>
[...]
