On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/06/2010 06:48 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>
>> We should not be idle when we get the ATH9K_INT_TIM_TIMER,
>> otherwise we wake up the chip and that throws off the idle
>> state, the driver needs to be in full sleep when idle and
>> nothing should turn it awake without turning it back to
>> full sleep again. If we leave the chip idle and suspend,
>> upon resume the device will become unusable and we get:
>>
>> ath: Starting driver with initial channel: 5745 MHz
>> ath: timeout (100000 us) on reg 0x7000: 0xdeadbeef& Â0x00000003 !=
>> 0x00000000
>>
>> Cc: Paul Stewart<pstew@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Amod Bodas<amod.bodas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez<lrodriguez@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> Âdrivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c | Â Â1 +
>> Â1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
>> b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
>> index f026a03..fd27ec9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
>> @@ -770,6 +770,7 @@ irqreturn_t ath_isr(int irq, void *dev)
>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Âif (status& ÂATH9K_INT_TIM_TIMER) {
>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â/* Clear RxAbort bit so that we can
>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â * receive frames */
>> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â WARN_ON(sc->ps_idle);
>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Âath9k_setpower(sc, ATH9K_PM_AWAKE);
>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Âath9k_hw_setrxabort(sc->sc_ah, 0);
>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Âsc->ps_flags |= PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON;
>
> Looks like this patch never made it in.
>
> Should it be in, or should I just drop it from my queue?
>
Eh, it shouldn't happen and if we warn we should use the new debugging
warn once thingy you added. I never saw that trigger so probably we
can just ignore it.
Luis
--
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
