On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 8:40 PM, John W. Linville
<linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 11:07:22AM +0100, Ivo Van Doorn wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> >> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Helmut Schaa
>> >> <helmut.schaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > Am Donnerstag 04 November 2010 schrieb Ivo van Doorn:
>> >> >> From: Helmut Schaa <helmut.schaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> At least some devices need such a long time to inititalize WPDMA. This
>> >> >> only increases the maximum wait time and shouldn't affect devices that
>> >> >> have been working before.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Reported-by: Joshua Smith <jesmith@xxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> Signed-off-by: Helmut Schaa <helmut.schaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> Signed-off-by: Ivo van Doorn <IvDoorn@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> ---
>> >> >
>> >> > Ivo, the patch context looks different then in the version I've send to you.
>> >> >
>> >> > The
>> >> > for (i = 0; i < REGISTER_BUSY_COUNT; i++) {
>> >> > should be
>> >> > for (i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
>> >> >
>> >> > Otherwise we don't wait up to one second as in the comment but just 50ms :P
>> >> >
>> >> > However, that change was part of a previous patch that was already merged into
>> >> > the rt2x00 git tree. Seems like that change got lost during the merge ...
>> >>
>> >> I'll try to find the patch which changed the REGISTER_BUSY_COUNT behavior.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure but I guess I haven't sent that one as separate [PATCH] but it
>> > was inlined in the mail traffic with Joshua ("Question about starting up an
>> > AP").
>>
>> Ah ok, that explains why I missed it. I'll dig it up, and send it to
>> wireless-testing
>> as soon as possible (John, do you want it as separate patch, or should
>> it be merged
>> into this patch?).
>
> Separate patch, please (if you haven't already sent it).
Ok, patch will follow today.
ivo
--
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
