On 2010-12-06 12:44 PM, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan wrote:
>> > I don't have any doc for this register yet.
>> I'm pretty sure that the format of the register is still exactly the
>> same. I guess they added a small frequency offset to reduce spur.
>>
>> >> But how exactly is *one* magic number (and it's even a very small one)
>> >> worse than 14 of them, especially since anybody can verify that the
>> >> generated raw values are exactly the same?
>> >
>> > Anyway, still this formula gets it wrong for channel 14.
>> > Lets have this table for now, I'll clean this up once I
>> > get the proper doc for this register?.
>> How did you test this? When I put this part into a test program, it
>> generates exactly the same values as the table all channels,
>> including 14.
>
> I just did the following
>
> #define CHANSEL_2G_9485(_freq) ((((freq) * 0x10000) - 215) / CHANSEL_DIV)
> for (i = 0; i < 14; i++) {
> freq = 2412 + (i * 5);
> printk("chan %d : %x \n",i + 1,CHANSEL_2G_9485(freq));
> }
>
> output:
>
> chan 1 : a0ccbe
> chan 2 : a12213
> chan 3 : a17769
> chan 4 : a1ccbe
> chan 5 : a22213
> chan 6 : a27769
> chan 7 : a2ccbe
> chan 8 : a32213
> chan 9 : a37769
> chan 10 : a3ccbe
> chan 11 : a42213
> chan 12 : a47769
> chan 13 : a4ccbe
> chan 14 : a52213
2412 + 13 * 5 == 2477, not 2484.
- Felix
--
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
