Search Linux Wireless

Re: [PATCH v2] b43: LP-PHY: Begin implementing calibration & software RFKILL support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Michael Buesch<mb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Monday 31 August 2009 19:53:31 John W. Linville wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 05:55:40PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
>> > On Sunday 30 August 2009 17:10:23 Larry Finger wrote:
>> > > Michael Buesch wrote:
>> > > > On Sunday 30 August 2009 02:15:55 Gábor Stefanik wrote:
>> > > >>  static void lpphy_pr41573_workaround(struct b43_wldev *dev)
>> > > >>  {
>> > > >>        struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp;
>> > > >> @@ -1357,28 +1488,440 @@ static void lpphy_pr41573_workaround(struct b43_wldev *dev)
>> > > >>                b43_lptab_read_bulk(dev, B43_LPTAB32(7, 0x140),
>> > > >>                                    saved_tab_size, saved_tab);
>> > > >>        }
>> > > >> +      b43_put_phy_into_reset(dev);
>> > > >
>> > > > Are you sure you really want this?
>> > > > This function completely disables the PHY on the backplane and keeps the physical
>> > > > PHY reset pin asserted (even after return from the function).
>> > > > So the PHY will physically be powered down from this point on. The following
>> > > > PHY accesses could even hang the machine, because the PHY won't respond to
>> > > > register accesses anymore.
>> > > >
>> > > > We currently only use this function on A/G Multi-PHY devices to permanently
>> > > > hard-disable the PHY that's not used.
>> > >
>> > > The PHY reset routine in
>> > > http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/802.11/PHY/Reset, which I just updated
>> > > for the latest N PHY changes, appears to be a different routine than
>> > > b43_put_phy_into_reset(). The names are confusing.
>> >
>> > b43_put_phy_into_reset() is opencoded in the specifications in various init
>> > routines. There's no separate specs page for that function.
>> > But I think the code is straightforward and easy to understand.
>>
>> So is this patch right or not?  Should I hold onto it for 2.6.33
>> (i.e. after the 2.6.32 merge window)?
>
> I'm pretty sure it's incorrect.
>
> --
> Greetings, Michael.
>

Do we have the correct reset routine implemented somewhere, or is it a
new routine to add?

-- 
Vista: [V]iruses, [I]ntruders, [S]pyware, [T]rojans and [A]dware. :-)
--
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Host AP]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Kernel]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux