From: Gabor Juhos <juhosg@openwrt.org>
To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
Subject: [ath9k-devel] [RFC] ath9k: use correct init values for ar9100 devices
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:57:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49AE96DA.9010208@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18862.36931.112561.497768@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Sujith ?rta:
> Gabor Juhos wrote:
>>>> +#define AR_SREV_5416(_ah) \
>>>> + (((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion == AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_PCIE) || \
>>>> + ((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion == AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_PCI))
>>>> +#define AR_SREV_5416_V20_OR_LATER(_ah) \
>>>> + (((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion > AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_PCIE) || \
>>>> + ((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
>>>> + ((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >= AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_20)))
>>>> +#define AR_SREV_5416_V22_OR_LATER(_ah) \
>>>> + (((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion > AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_PCIE) || \
>>>> + ((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
>>>> + ((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >= AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_22)))
>>>> +
>>> Hm, the 5416_V1, 5416_V2 macros have to check 3 different HW (5416, 9100, 9160).
>> I don't see any 5416_V1 macro here. The AR_SREV_5416 should check the silicon
>> revision of the AR5416 cards only. But if we would be consistent, we should have
>> a _V10_OR_LATER although i don't see where it would be useful. The _V20_OR_LATER
>> and the _V22_OR_LATER macro I proposed above will cover the 9100 and 9160 chips.
>>
>
> I meant the AR_SREV_5416_V20_OR_LATER and AR_SREV_5416_V22_OR_LATER macros.
> Yes, the naming implies that they are meant for AR5416 chipsets only, but they
> do handle AR9100 and AR9160 chipsets.
>
> The proposed macros don't have the AR9100 and AR9160 macVersion checks, no ?
You are right, they don't have such version checks explicitly, but
AR_SREV_VERSION_9100 > AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_PCIE and
AR_SREV_VERSION_9160 > AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_PCIE
Maybe this looks cleaner:
#define AR_SREV_5416_V20_OR_LATER(_ah) \
(((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >= AR_SREV_VERSION_9100) || \
((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >= AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_20)))
#define AR_SREV_5416_V22_OR_LATER(_ah) \
(((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >= AR_SREV_VERSION_9100) || \
((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >= AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_22)))
or in this form:
#define AR_SREV_5416_V20_OR_LATER(_ah) \
(((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >= AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_20)) || \
((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >= AR_SREV_VERSION_9100))
#define AR_SREV_5416_V22_OR_LATER(_ah) \
(((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >= AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_22)) || \
((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >= AR_SREV_VERSION_9100))
Regards,
Gabor
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Gabor Juhos <juhosg@openwrt.org>
To: Sujith <m.sujith@gmail.com>
Cc: "ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org" <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC] ath9k: use correct init values for ar9100 devices
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:57:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49AE96DA.9010208@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18862.36931.112561.497768@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Sujith =EDrta:
> Gabor Juhos wrote:
>>>> +#define AR_SREV_5416(_ah) \
>>>> + (((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion =3D=3D AR_SREV_VERSION_5416=
_PCIE) || \
>>>> + ((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion =3D=3D AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_=
PCI))
>>>> +#define AR_SREV_5416_V20_OR_LATER(_ah) \
>>>> + (((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion > AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_PCIE=
) || \
>>>> + ((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
>>>> + ((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >=3D AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_20)))
>>>> +#define AR_SREV_5416_V22_OR_LATER(_ah) \
>>>> + (((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion > AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_PCIE=
) || \
>>>> + ((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
>>>> + ((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >=3D AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_22)))
>>>> +
>>> Hm, the 5416_V1, 5416_V2 macros have to check 3 different HW (5416,=
9100, 9160).
>> I don't see any 5416_V1 macro here. The AR_SREV_5416 should check th=
e silicon
>> revision of the AR5416 cards only. But if we would be consistent, we=
should have
>> a _V10_OR_LATER although i don't see where it would be useful. The _=
V20_OR_LATER
>> and the _V22_OR_LATER macro I proposed above will cover the 9100 and=
9160 chips.
>>
>=20
> I meant the AR_SREV_5416_V20_OR_LATER and AR_SREV_5416_V22_OR_LATER m=
acros.
> Yes, the naming implies that they are meant for AR5416 chipsets only,=
but they
> do handle AR9100 and AR9160 chipsets.
>=20
> The proposed macros don't have the AR9100 and AR9160 macVersion check=
s, no ?
You are right, they don't have such version checks explicitly, but
AR_SREV_VERSION_9100 > AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_PCIE and
AR_SREV_VERSION_9160 > AR_SREV_VERSION_5416_PCIE
Maybe this looks cleaner:
#define AR_SREV_5416_V20_OR_LATER(_ah) \
(((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >=3D AR_SREV_VERSION_9100) || \
((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >=3D AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_20)))
#define AR_SREV_5416_V22_OR_LATER(_ah) \
(((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >=3D AR_SREV_VERSION_9100) || \
((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >=3D AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_22)))
or in this form:
#define AR_SREV_5416_V20_OR_LATER(_ah) \
(((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >=3D AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_20)) || \
((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >=3D AR_SREV_VERSION_9100))
#define AR_SREV_5416_V22_OR_LATER(_ah) \
(((AR_SREV_5416(_ah)) && \
((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >=3D AR_SREV_REVISION_5416_22)) || \
((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >=3D AR_SREV_VERSION_9100))
Regards,
Gabor
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireles=
s" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-04 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-03 18:10 [ath9k-devel] [RFC] ath9k: use correct init values for ar9100 devices Gabor Juhos
2009-03-03 18:10 ` Gabor Juhos
2009-03-04 4:30 ` [ath9k-devel] " Sujith
2009-03-04 4:30 ` Sujith
2009-03-04 5:35 ` [ath9k-devel] " Sujith
2009-03-04 5:35 ` Sujith
2009-03-04 13:38 ` [ath9k-devel] " Gabor Juhos
2009-03-04 14:21 ` Sujith
2009-03-04 14:21 ` Sujith
2009-03-04 16:20 ` Gabor Juhos
2009-03-04 16:20 ` Gabor Juhos
2009-03-05 1:49 ` Sujith
2009-03-05 1:49 ` Sujith
2009-03-05 10:43 ` Gabor Juhos
2009-03-05 10:43 ` Gabor Juhos
2009-03-05 15:00 ` Sujith
2009-03-05 15:00 ` Sujith
2009-03-04 13:41 ` Gabor Juhos
2009-03-04 13:41 ` Gabor Juhos
2009-03-04 14:29 ` [ath9k-devel] " Sujith
2009-03-04 14:29 ` Sujith
2009-03-04 14:57 ` Gabor Juhos [this message]
2009-03-04 14:57 ` Gabor Juhos
2009-03-05 1:51 ` Sujith
2009-03-05 1:51 ` Sujith
2009-03-05 2:15 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-03-05 2:15 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
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=49AE96DA.9010208@openwrt.org \
--to=juhosg@openwrt.org \
--cc=ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org \
/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.