Hi Larry,
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 05:07:03PM -0400, Forest Bond wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 02:17:51PM -0400, Forest Bond wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:23:20AM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
> > > On 07/12/2012 10:25 AM, Forest Bond wrote:
> > > >On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 08:58:16PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
> > > >>On 07/11/2012 08:32 PM, Forest Bond wrote:
> > > >>>On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 07:58:04PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
> > > >>>>On 07/11/2012 07:21 PM, Forest Bond wrote:
> > > >>>>>The rtl8192de driver is working fine for me at 5GHz, but I am having trouble
> > > >>>>>getting scan results for 2.4GHz 802.11g networks. I have been doing a lot of
> > > >>>>>debugging but am not making much progress. I suspect the 802.11 b/g/n phy is
> > > >>>>>not being initialized correctly, but I'm pretty far outside my domain on this
> > > >>>>>one.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>Is anyone successfully using this driver with a 2.4GHz 802.11g network?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>I have several different models - some work better than others. What
> > > >>>>is the PCI ID for yours?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>This is the one I have:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>02:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. Device [10ec:8193]
> > > >>>02:00.1 Network controller [0280]: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. Device [10ec:8193] (rev 01)
> > > >>
> > > >>It turns out that both kinds have the same ID. I think one of them
> > > >>is a prototype, while the other is probably a production unit.
> > > >>Obviously, bitrot has set in while I wasn't testing. With the kernel
> > > >>driver, neither unit can even scan in the 2.4 GHz band. Using the
> > > >>latest version of the vendor driver, the production version connects
> > > >>with APs running WEP, WPA, or WPA2. The prototype can only handle
> > > >>WEP.
> > > >>
> > > >>Obviously, I have some work to do. In the meantime, I will send you
> > > >>a tarball containing the vendor driver - privately so as not to spam
> > > >>the list.
> > > >
> > > >Thank you, I appreciate that.
> > > >
> > > >Of course, my preference would be to fix up the kernel driver. I don't mind
> > > >doing some manual bisection with compat-wireless releases unless you think that
> > > >would be a total waste of time. Do you have any sense for what the last working
> > > >kernel version would have been?
> > > >
> > > >As you suggest, we may need to use the vendor driver in the meantime. Thanks
> > > >again for sending it over (although I suspect it is the same version I
> > > >downloaded from Realtek's web site).
> > >
> > > It started with the Realtek version, but has some important bug
> > > fixes that I wanted you to have.
> >
> > Thanks, that's really helpful.
> >
> > > Of course, we want to fix the kernel version, but if you want to
> > > bisect compat-wireless, that would be a big help. In the meantime, I
> > > will try bisecting wireless-testing when I get a chance.
> >
> > I have begun disecting compat-wireless releases. 3.1.1-1 works, 3.2.5-1
> > doesn't. I'm going to try to identify the commit that broke things by applying
> > patches to 3.1.1-1.
>
> So unless I screwed something up while bisecting, I think this is where things
> broke:
>
>
> commit d83579e2a50ac68389e6b4c58b845c702cf37516
> Author: Chaoming Li <chaoming_li@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue Oct 11 21:28:51 2011 -0500
>
> rtlwifi: rtl8192de: Updates from latest Reaktek driver - Part III
>
> This patch incorporate the differences between the 06/20/2011 and
> 08/16/2011 Realtek releases of the rtl8192de driver.
>
> The changes include:
>
> 1. Update for new chip versions
>
> Signed-off-by: Chaoming Li <chaoming_li@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> I managed to get into an interesting situation at one point during testing where
> neither MAC would return scan results, even after reverting to a known-good
> driver version. This was resolved by removing and re-applying power (i.e. a
> reboot did not fix it). Something must've put the hardware in a bad state. I
> haven't seen this problem again.
>
> Anyway, I'll probably play with that patch a bit to see if I can figure out what
> broke, but let me know if you have any ideas.
So this seems to fix things:
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/phy.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/phy.c
index 18380a7..be21c81 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/phy.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/phy.c
@@ -3345,21 +3345,25 @@ void rtl92d_phy_config_macphymode_info(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
switch (rtlhal->macphymode) {
case DUALMAC_SINGLEPHY:
rtlphy->rf_type = RF_2T2R;
- rtlhal->version |= CHIP_92D_SINGLEPHY;
+ /*rtlhal->version |= CHIP_92D_SINGLEPHY;*/
+ rtlhal->version |= RF_TYPE_2T2R;
rtlhal->bandset = BAND_ON_BOTH;
rtlhal->current_bandtype = BAND_ON_2_4G;
break;
case SINGLEMAC_SINGLEPHY:
rtlphy->rf_type = RF_2T2R;
- rtlhal->version |= CHIP_92D_SINGLEPHY;
+ /*rtlhal->version |= CHIP_92D_SINGLEPHY;*/
+ rtlhal->version |= RF_TYPE_2T2R;
rtlhal->bandset = BAND_ON_BOTH;
rtlhal->current_bandtype = BAND_ON_2_4G;
break;
case DUALMAC_DUALPHY:
rtlphy->rf_type = RF_1T1R;
- rtlhal->version &= (~CHIP_92D_SINGLEPHY);
+ /*rtlhal->version &= (~CHIP_92D_SINGLEPHY);*/
+ rtlhal->version &= RF_TYPE_1T1R;
+
/* Now we let MAC0 run on 5G band. */
if (rtlhal->interfaceindex == 0) {
rtlhal->bandset = BAND_ON_5G;
And this is unrelated, but also seems important:
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/hw.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/hw.c
index b338d52..59e85f5 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/hw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/hw.c
@@ -1058,11 +1058,14 @@ static enum version_8192d _rtl92de_read_chip_version(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
u32 value32;
value32 = rtl_read_dword(rtlpriv, REG_SYS_CFG);
+ version |= CHIP_92D;
+
if (!(value32 & 0x000f0000)) {
version = VERSION_TEST_CHIP_92D_SINGLEPHY;
RT_TRACE(rtlpriv, COMP_INIT, DBG_LOUD, "TEST CHIP!!!\n");
} else {
- version = VERSION_NORMAL_CHIP_92D_SINGLEPHY;
+ /*version = VERSION_NORMAL_CHIP_92D_SINGLEPHY;*/
+ version |= NORMAL_CHIP;
RT_TRACE(rtlpriv, COMP_INIT, DBG_LOUD, "Normal CHIP!!!\n");
}
return version;
Let me know what you think. I can prepare some proper patches sometime
tomorrow.
Thanks,
Forest
--
Forest Bond
http://www.alittletooquiet.net
http://www.rapidrollout.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
