From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Arend van Spriel" <arend@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: brcm80211 breakage..
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:46:31 +0100
Message-ID: <4F0F3897.7040200@broadcom.com>
References: <CA+55aFxw5e3EYCGYjkWiTmhy9-WaY4T_-MF7EYcn4jXuBoxAgw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F0D6806.4080201@broadcom.com>
 <CA+55aFxzFKkUPSCU6Wr_FBPd6NFPeTctGR0kpqYJJ8fcw+ck7w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFw7TdNzNi86cwF4o6xSWnbKuPS5CuhdbChzoboNw_1-Tw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F0DC030.6090500@lwfinger.net>
 <CA+55aFyAX_OdE7yNp1vM1AmywrYZ9Pvr0EX47jNQciZKOQUQHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F0E3B7E.8040005@lwfinger.net>
 <CA+55aFyR9C8GjhKb8orr1kgd_G23=-mcmT-uz9zJd6wk7rYDPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F0E5E57.9060204@lwfinger.net>
 <CA+55aFw0XArx0jpNh4dWYFmvJbb+GJYAWRUN2Ec14oREiATo7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFxDOr_TT+kxp1SuwNFfm7KLTaWSLQwk1Fx8fWe7tdstcg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFzkCXnHfF_TO5M+gaN4RMvj_WNuW_QeBezuYBdWnwPDpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFx2UnVZP1Z44dMHeifB2nD1zJ87kz25zZjUdwv0ozwKPA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=iso-8859-2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "Larry Finger" <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
	"Alwin Beukers" <alwin@broadcom.com>,
	"Roland Vossen" <rvossen@broadcom.com>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	"Network Development" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Franky (Zhenhui) Lin" <frankyl@broadcom.com>,
	=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Rafa=B3_Mi=B3ecki?= <zajec5@gmail.com>
To: "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mms2.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.18]:2974 "EHLO mms2.broadcom.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1755140Ab2ALTqr (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:46:47 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFx2UnVZP1Z44dMHeifB2nD1zJ87kz25zZjUdwv0ozwKPA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On 01/12/2012 08:00 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> All the BCMA changes make the revert somewhat non-trivial, could
>> somebody who knows the code better please try to do it for me? It
>> doesn't look complicated, and I can try to do it myself tomorrow if
>> nobody else steps up, but I'd *really* prefer the guilty parties
>> themselves to do it, ok?
> 
> Since I had the hardware to test, I could work on this and try to
> figure out exactly what went wrong in that commit.

I was trying to get my hands on a card with SPROM to dig in and I still
intend to get it because Apples are no pears.

> The problem seems to be simple: the SPROM contents *have* to be read
> as aligned 16-bit words. Anything else seems to return 0xff and just
> fails the transaction.

I was already wondering what aspect of the patch was causing the issue.
The transaction size requirement seems likely and I was not aware.

> I didn't check all the combinations, of course, so who knows what the
> exact details are, but it does look like the sprom has very limited
> pci decode and simply refuses to touch anything but the one case it
> can handle.
> 
> I'll send out a patch that seems to get things to a working state for
> me. At least I have wireless connectivity again, I don't know if there
> are some other problems remaining.
> 
>                       Linus
> 

Thanks for putting the effort into this in the middle of a merge window.

Gr. AvS