On 05/31/2012 04:26 PM, Seth Forshee wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 04:16:05PM +0200, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: >> Hi Seth, >> >> why don't you call this from bcma_pmu_workarounds() in >> drivers/bcma/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c instead of calling this from b43? I >> think it looks better to call some workarounds on chip common from bcma >> and not from b43. > > Arend recommended calling it from within b43's start op, but I'm not > sure of the reason. Arend? > > Agreed though that if there's no need to run it every time the interface > is started then bcma_pmu_workarounds() would be a nicer place for it. brcmsmac calls the chip specific the workarounds in ai_doattach(), but the ones for BCM4313 and BCM43224 are also in bcma_pmu_workarounds(), this should be cleaned up to have them just at one place. In some old version of brcmsmac the workaround for the BCM4331 was also called from ai_doattach() function, but later removed likely because this devices is not supported by brcmsmac. So if there is not better reason as, the proprietary Broadcom driver does so, I would like to see this call in bcma_pmu_workarounds(). >> According to some Broadcom code this should also be called for chip_id >> 43431 when turning it on and in the sprom code. > > I'm having trouble parsing this, specifically the "and in the sprom > code" part. Can you clarify? In the Broadcom SDK code si_chipcontrl_epa4331(), the same function as bcma_chipco_bcm4331_ext_pa_lines_ctl() in bcma, gets called for devices with a chip id of 0x4331 and 43431, both seam to be BCM4331 devices. We should also call our workarounds for both chip ids. 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
