From: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: "Larry Finger" <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
"Gábor Stefanik" <netrolller.3d@gmail.com>,
"Mark Huijgen" <mark@huijgen.tk>,
"Broadcom Wireless" <bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] b43: LP-PHY: Begin implementing calibration & software RFKILL support
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 21:17:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200908312117.26915.mb@bu3sch.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090831175331.GB5631@tuxdriver.com>
On Monday 31 August 2009 19:53:31 John W. Linville wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 05:55:40PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 August 2009 17:10:23 Larry Finger wrote:
> > > Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 30 August 2009 02:15:55 Gábor Stefanik wrote:
> > > >> static void lpphy_pr41573_workaround(struct b43_wldev *dev)
> > > >> {
> > > >> struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp;
> > > >> @@ -1357,28 +1488,440 @@ static void lpphy_pr41573_workaround(struct b43_wldev *dev)
> > > >> b43_lptab_read_bulk(dev, B43_LPTAB32(7, 0x140),
> > > >> saved_tab_size, saved_tab);
> > > >> }
> > > >> + b43_put_phy_into_reset(dev);
> > > >
> > > > Are you sure you really want this?
> > > > This function completely disables the PHY on the backplane and keeps the physical
> > > > PHY reset pin asserted (even after return from the function).
> > > > So the PHY will physically be powered down from this point on. The following
> > > > PHY accesses could even hang the machine, because the PHY won't respond to
> > > > register accesses anymore.
> > > >
> > > > We currently only use this function on A/G Multi-PHY devices to permanently
> > > > hard-disable the PHY that's not used.
> > >
> > > The PHY reset routine in
> > > http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/802.11/PHY/Reset, which I just updated
> > > for the latest N PHY changes, appears to be a different routine than
> > > b43_put_phy_into_reset(). The names are confusing.
> >
> > b43_put_phy_into_reset() is opencoded in the specifications in various init
> > routines. There's no separate specs page for that function.
> > But I think the code is straightforward and easy to understand.
>
> So is this patch right or not? Should I hold onto it for 2.6.33
> (i.e. after the 2.6.32 merge window)?
I'm pretty sure it's incorrect.
--
Greetings, Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-31 19:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-30 0:15 [PATCH v2] b43: LP-PHY: Begin implementing calibration & software RFKILL support Gábor Stefanik
2009-08-30 10:28 ` Michael Buesch
2009-08-30 15:10 ` Larry Finger
2009-08-30 15:55 ` Michael Buesch
2009-08-31 17:53 ` John W. Linville
2009-08-31 19:17 ` Michael Buesch [this message]
2009-08-31 19:23 ` Larry Finger
2009-08-31 19:38 ` Gábor Stefanik
2009-09-01 12:55 ` Michael Buesch
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200908312117.26915.mb@bu3sch.de \
--to=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=mark@huijgen.tk \
--cc=netrolller.3d@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.