Re: dvb_usb_af9015: command failed=1 _ kernel >= 4.1.x

[poma <pomidorabelisima@gmail.com>]

On 13.07.2015 11:48, poma wrote:
> On 07.07.2015 10:48, poma wrote:
>> On 06.07.2015 22:17, Jose Alberto Reguero wrote:
>>> I made the patch for the af9035. I have not a af9015 whith mxl5007 and dual channel. Revert it, if it cause regresions.
>>>
>>> Jose Alberto
>>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> From e19560ea038e54dc57be717db55f19d449df63f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: poma <pomidorabelisima@gmail.com>
>> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 10:26:13 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] Fix for AF9015 DVB-T USB2.0 stick
>>
>> This reverts commitas:
>>
>> - 02f9cf96df57575acea2e6eb4041e9f3ecd32548
>>   "[media] [PATH,2/2] mxl5007 move loop_thru to attach"
>> - fe4860af002a4516dd878f7297b61e186c475b35
>>   "[media] [PATH,1/2] mxl5007 move reset to attach"
>>
>> This is the conclusion after extensive testing,
>> these two commitas produce:
>>
>> mxl5007t_soft_reset: 521: failed!
>> mxl5007t_attach: error -121 on line 907
>>
>> causing AF9015 DVB-T USB2.0 stick completely unusable.
>>
>>
>> Tested-by: poma <pomidorabelisima@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/media/tuners/mxl5007t.c | 30 +++++-------------------------
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/tuners/mxl5007t.c b/drivers/media/tuners/mxl5007t.c
>> index f4ae04c..f8c4ba2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/tuners/mxl5007t.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/tuners/mxl5007t.c
>> @@ -374,6 +374,7 @@ static struct reg_pair_t *mxl5007t_calc_init_regs(struct mxl5007t_state *state,
>>  	mxl5007t_set_if_freq_bits(state, cfg->if_freq_hz, cfg->invert_if);
>>  	mxl5007t_set_xtal_freq_bits(state, cfg->xtal_freq_hz);
>>  
>> +	set_reg_bits(state->tab_init, 0x04, 0x01, cfg->loop_thru_enable);
>>  	set_reg_bits(state->tab_init, 0x03, 0x08, cfg->clk_out_enable << 3);
>>  	set_reg_bits(state->tab_init, 0x03, 0x07, cfg->clk_out_amp);
>>  
>> @@ -530,6 +531,10 @@ static int mxl5007t_tuner_init(struct mxl5007t_state *state,
>>  	struct reg_pair_t *init_regs;
>>  	int ret;
>>  
>> +	ret = mxl5007t_soft_reset(state);
>> +	if (mxl_fail(ret))
>> +		goto fail;
>> +
>>  	/* calculate initialization reg array */
>>  	init_regs = mxl5007t_calc_init_regs(state, mode);
>>  
>> @@ -895,32 +900,7 @@ struct dvb_frontend *mxl5007t_attach(struct dvb_frontend *fe,
>>  		/* existing tuner instance */
>>  		break;
>>  	}
>> -
>> -	if (fe->ops.i2c_gate_ctrl)
>> -		fe->ops.i2c_gate_ctrl(fe, 1);
>> -
>> -	ret = mxl5007t_soft_reset(state);
>> -
>> -	if (fe->ops.i2c_gate_ctrl)
>> -		fe->ops.i2c_gate_ctrl(fe, 0);
>> -
>> -	if (mxl_fail(ret))
>> -		goto fail;
>> -
>> -	if (fe->ops.i2c_gate_ctrl)
>> -		fe->ops.i2c_gate_ctrl(fe, 1);
>> -
>> -	ret = mxl5007t_write_reg(state, 0x04,
>> -		state->config->loop_thru_enable);
>> -
>> -	if (fe->ops.i2c_gate_ctrl)
>> -		fe->ops.i2c_gate_ctrl(fe, 0);
>> -
>> -	if (mxl_fail(ret))
>> -		goto fail;
>> -
>>  	fe->tuner_priv = state;
>> -
>>  	mutex_unlock(&mxl5007t_list_mutex);
>>  
>>  	memcpy(&fe->ops.tuner_ops, &mxl5007t_tuner_ops,
>>
> 
> 
> Guys, any chance to push this any time soon?
> 
> 

Will someone finally push this?