All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>
To: Florian Fainelli <florian@openwrt.org>
Cc: "Michael Büsch" <mb@bu3sch.de>,
	"John Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	"Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>,
	"Gábor Stefanik" <netrolller.3d@gmail.com>,
	b43-dev <b43-dev@lists.infradead.org>,
	wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RFC - removal of SPROM fallback
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:08:22 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CF6D566.4050301@lwfinger.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CF6CA2F.5050704@openwrt.org>

On 12/01/2010 04:20 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Le 01/12/2010 22:56, Michael B?sch a ?crit :
>> On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 13:15 -0600, Larry Finger wrote:
>>> At one time, we thought that we had found BCM43xx devices with no
>>> SPROM. In the
>>> one case that I remember, it was because the SPROM had been relocated.
>>>
>>> I now have the data from John's device that needs the revision fixup
>>> and I know
>>> what is wrong - it is rev 2 with corrupted CRC. The defaulting to rev
>>> 1 is
>>> getting almost everything wrong, including MAC address and vendor. My
>>> plan is to
>>> write a better fixup routine.
>>>
>>> At the moment, we have some SPROM fallback code that has not been fully
>>> implemented, and is probably not needed. Are there any objections to
>>> stripping
>>> this code out of drivers/ssb/pci.c and drivers/ssb/sprom.c?
>>
>> Yes. The code is needed for bcm63xx embedded devices. The code that uses
>> it currently is not in mainline, though. It can be found in the OpenWRT
>> repositories.
> 
> It actually is mainline and used.
> 
>>
>> But I still think that the SPROM fallback mechanism should be replaced
>> by a "platform data" based mechanism, or similar. Just removing it
>> without replacement is not an option, because bcm63xx embedded really
>> does not have an SPROM.
> 
> Correct. The rationale behind this is that if you have a big flash for
> your system, you do not want to afford the cost for another flash chip
> storing the SPROM. Whichever mechanism works for your, I will do the
> required changes in the bcm63xx architecture code.

There is no need for that. I'll start my changes after the check for a fallback
SPROM returns NULL. My only reason for removing anything is that I thought it
was not used.

Larry

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>
To: Florian Fainelli <florian@openwrt.org>
Cc: "Michael Büsch" <mb@bu3sch.de>,
	"John Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	"Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>,
	"Gábor Stefanik" <netrolller.3d@gmail.com>,
	b43-dev <b43-dev@lists.infradead.org>,
	wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC - removal of SPROM fallback
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:08:22 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CF6D566.4050301@lwfinger.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CF6CA2F.5050704@openwrt.org>

On 12/01/2010 04:20 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Le 01/12/2010 22:56, Michael Büsch a écrit :
>> On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 13:15 -0600, Larry Finger wrote:
>>> At one time, we thought that we had found BCM43xx devices with no
>>> SPROM. In the
>>> one case that I remember, it was because the SPROM had been relocated.
>>>
>>> I now have the data from John's device that needs the revision fixup
>>> and I know
>>> what is wrong - it is rev 2 with corrupted CRC. The defaulting to rev
>>> 1 is
>>> getting almost everything wrong, including MAC address and vendor. My
>>> plan is to
>>> write a better fixup routine.
>>>
>>> At the moment, we have some SPROM fallback code that has not been fully
>>> implemented, and is probably not needed. Are there any objections to
>>> stripping
>>> this code out of drivers/ssb/pci.c and drivers/ssb/sprom.c?
>>
>> Yes. The code is needed for bcm63xx embedded devices. The code that uses
>> it currently is not in mainline, though. It can be found in the OpenWRT
>> repositories.
> 
> It actually is mainline and used.
> 
>>
>> But I still think that the SPROM fallback mechanism should be replaced
>> by a "platform data" based mechanism, or similar. Just removing it
>> without replacement is not an option, because bcm63xx embedded really
>> does not have an SPROM.
> 
> Correct. The rationale behind this is that if you have a big flash for
> your system, you do not want to afford the cost for another flash chip
> storing the SPROM. Whichever mechanism works for your, I will do the
> required changes in the bcm63xx architecture code.

There is no need for that. I'll start my changes after the check for a fallback
SPROM returns NULL. My only reason for removing anything is that I thought it
was not used.

Larry


  reply	other threads:[~2010-12-01 23:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-12-01 19:15 RFC - removal of SPROM fallback Larry Finger
2010-12-01 19:55 ` Rafał Miłecki
2010-12-01 19:55   ` Rafał Miłecki
2010-12-01 21:56 ` Michael Büsch
2010-12-01 21:56   ` Michael Büsch
2010-12-01 22:20   ` Florian Fainelli
2010-12-01 23:08     ` Larry Finger [this message]
2010-12-01 23:08       ` Larry Finger

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=4CF6D566.4050301@lwfinger.net \
    --to=larry.finger@lwfinger.net \
    --cc=b43-dev@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=florian@openwrt.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=mb@bu3sch.de \
    --cc=netrolller.3d@gmail.com \
    --cc=zajec5@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.