On Wednesday 06 January 2010 16:40:32 Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> b43: N-PHY: implement b43_nphy_stay_carrier_search and it's calls
Hm, The phrase "stay carrier earch" doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Is "stray carrier search" or something like that meant?
Not that I care much, but I'm just wondering if this is just a typo.
> +static void b43_nphy_write_clip_detection(struct b43_wldev *dev, u16 *vals)
We know that these values are the clip thresholds, so use a better variable name, please.
> +{
> + b43_phy_write(dev, B43_NPHY_C1_CLIP1THRES, vals[0]);
> + b43_phy_write(dev, B43_NPHY_C2_CLIP1THRES, vals[1]);
> +}
> +
> +static void b43_nphy_read_clip_detection(struct b43_wldev *dev, u16 *vals)
> +{
> + vals[0] = b43_phy_read(dev, B43_NPHY_C1_CLIP1THRES);
> + vals[1] = b43_phy_read(dev, B43_NPHY_C2_CLIP1THRES);
> +}
> +
> +static u16 b43_nphy_classifier(struct b43_wldev *dev, u16 mask, u16 val)
> +{
> + u16 tmp;
> + bool suspended = false;
> +
> + if (dev->dev->id.revision == 16 && dev->mac_suspended == 0) {
Do not check for mac_suspended==0 here. b43_mac_suspended does this internally.
> + b43_mac_suspend(dev);
> + suspended = true;
> + }
> +
> + tmp = b43_phy_read(dev, B43_NPHY_CLASSCTL);
> + tmp &= (B43_NPHY_CLASSCTL_CCKEN | B43_NPHY_CLASSCTL_OFDMEN |
> + B43_NPHY_CLASSCTL_WAITEDEN);
> + tmp &= ~mask;
> + tmp |= (val & mask);
> + b43_phy_maskset(dev, B43_NPHY_CLASSCTL, 0xFFF8, tmp);
> +
> + if (suspended)
> + b43_mac_enable(dev);
> +
> + return tmp;
> +}
> +
> +static void b43_nphy_stay_carrier_search(struct b43_wldev *dev, bool enable)
> +{
> + struct b43_phy *phy = &dev->phy;
> + struct b43_phy_n *nphy = phy->n;
> +
> + if (enable) {
> + u16 clip[] = { 0xFFFF, 0xFFFF };
> + if (nphy->deaf_count++ == 0) {
> + nphy->classifier_state = b43_nphy_classifier(dev, 0, 0);
> + b43_nphy_classifier(dev, 0x7, 0);
> + b43_nphy_read_clip_detection(dev, nphy->clip_state);
> + b43_nphy_write_clip_detection(dev, clip);
> + }
> + b43_nphy_reset_cca(dev);
> + } else {
> + if (--nphy->deaf_count != 0) {
If this test logic correct? The following would make more sense to me:
if (--nphy->deaf_count == 0) {
> + b43_nphy_classifier(dev, 0x7, nphy->classifier_state);
> + b43_nphy_write_clip_detection(dev, nphy->clip_state);
> + }
> + }
> +}
> +
> enum b43_nphy_rf_sequence {
> B43_RFSEQ_RX2TX,
> B43_RFSEQ_TX2RX,
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_n.h b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_n.h
> index e5e402a..6ab07fc 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_n.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_n.h
> @@ -932,6 +932,9 @@ struct b43_phy_n {
> u32 deaf_count;
> bool mute;
>
> + u16 classifier_state;
> + u16 clip_state[2];
> +
> u8 iqcal_chanspec_2G;
> u8 rssical_chanspec_2G;
>
--
Greetings, Michael.
--
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
