2011/5/7 Arend van Spriel <arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On 05/07/2011 03:55 PM, Michael BÃsch wrote: >> >>> Arnd: did you have a look at defines at all? >>> >>> Most of the defines have values in range 0x800 â 0x837. Converting >>> this to array means loosing 0x800 u16 entries. We can not use 0x800 >>> offset, because there are also some defined between 0x000 and 0x800: >>> #define BCMA_CORE_OOB_ROUTER Â Â Â Â Â 0x367 Â /* Out of band */ >>> #define BCMA_CORE_INVALID Â Â Â Â Â Â Â0x700 > > Please be aware that the core identifier itself is not unique (in the > current list they are). In the scan the BCMA_CORE_OOB_ROUTER will always > show BCMA_MANUF_ARM (did not look up the proper manufacturer define but you > get the idea, i hope). Unfortunately, I don't. Could you explain this? How core identified can be not unique? Can 0x800 mean ChipCommon but also SuperPCIeX? -- RafaÅ -- 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
