On 03/01/2012 04:16 PM, Arend van Spriel wrote: > On 03/01/2012 03:35 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: >> On 03/01/2012 03:12 PM, Arend van Spriel wrote: >>> On 02/28/2012 09:11 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: >>>> On 02/27/2012 11:12 AM, Arend van Spriel wrote: >>>>> On 02/25/2012 01:52 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: >>>>>> I will test you patch on my device soon and will report if >>>>>> something is >>>>>> wrong. If you are sending a non RFC patch in the next days I would >>>>>> rebase my patch onto yours. The code searching in the SoCs flash chip >>>>>> will be added to run if bcma_sprom_onchip_available() returns false. >>>>> >>>>> Appreciate any testing on SoCs. I think I will need some time to >>>>> modify >>>>> brcmsmac so let your patch go first. >>>> >>>> The sprom part of my SoC is working with this patch on top of my sprom >>>> patches, but it uses the sprom from flash/nvram for both wifi devices >>>> (one integrated in the bCM4716 and the other a BCM43224 connected to >>>> the >>>> PCIe host controller of the BCM4716). >>>> For my BCM4716 bcma_sprom_ext_available() and >>>> bcma_sprom_onchip_available() are returning false and for the BCM43224 >>>> bcma_sprom_ext_available() is returning false and >>>> bcma_sprom_onchip_offset() 0. >>> >>> Thanks, Hauke >>> >>> Did the BCM43224 come with the router. If so I am assuming the onchip is >>> not used and the system relies on flash/nvram completely. I will inform >>> whether my assumption is correct. >> Yes the BCM43224 is direly soldered onto the board where also the >> BCM4716 is on, there is no physical PCIe port or something like this. >> The nvram on the flash chip contains the sprom for this devices, one set >> of variables in the nvram has the prefix pci/1/1/ (for the BCM43224 with >> the options for 5GHz only) and the other has sb/1/ (for the BCM4716 with >> the options for 2.4 GHz only). >> >> It is this device: http://infodepot.wikia.com/wiki/Netgear_WNDR3400 >> >> Hauke >> > > You made me curious so I followed the link. It says BCM4718. The BCM4716, BCM4717 and BCM4718 are the same chips from a driver developer point of view. ;-) They share the same device id (0x4716), just the package id is different. The BCM4717 and BCM4718 have a PCIe host controller, the BCM4716 does not have a PCIe host controller. The BCM4718 also has a higher CPU clock than the others. The PCIe host controller is automatically detected and the CPU clock speed is read out of some register. They are sharing the same workarounds in the driver. So if I speak of the BCM4716 mostly I mean all of these three or one of these three. ;-) Hauke -- 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
