W dniu 5 marca 2012 10:16 użytkownik Arend van Spriel <arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx> napisał: > On 03/03/2012 11:44 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> >> 2012/2/28 Hauke Mehrtens<hauke@xxxxxxxxxx>: >>> >>> On 02/27/2012 11:12 AM, Arend van Spriel wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> 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. >> >> >> I guess that's wrong...? So is there something wrong with the Arend's >> patch causing this regression? Or was this wrong even earlier? >> >> I'm not sure if I should test this patch against my cards or should I >> wait for V2. >> > > Hi Rafał, > > It is not wrong. I asked Hauke a question about his router regarding this. > The story for routers is that sprom data for both cards resides in > nvram/flash, ie. the fallback sprom source in Hauke's patch. OK, I gave it a try, it works with my BCM43224, nice work. > Not sure why > that bcma patch has not yet made it into wireless-next. Have you sent it in final form and without RFC? I don't think I've received it. -- Rafał -- 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
