From: "Michael Büsch" <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>
Cc: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, b43-dev@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ssb: fail registration for unknown SPROM revision
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:47:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1290098865.12596.6.camel@maggie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimh_8X1uRPudmQLDOTeA_X0ciR9BbDgyahLDMSs@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20101118_174421_892253_3B53C8D3)
On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 17:44 +0100, Rafa? Mi?ecki wrote:
> 2010/11/18 Michael B?sch <mb@bu3sch.de>:
> >> [ 1036.293865] ssb: Unsupported SPROM revision 255 detected. Will extract v1
> >
> > So what about specialcasing 255 instead of defaulting to 1 in general?
> >
> > if (rev == 255)
> > rev = 1;
> >
> > 255 basically means "Vendor forgot to set this field". So it would only
> > default to 1 for those broken sproms.
>
> Will work as long as there won't appear new vendor who will forget to
> set this and will use new SPROM...
The old code will break for that, too.
> But hopefully it won't happen and it should not hurt too much to
> register device with incorrectly parsed SPROM.
If it would really succeed to initialize the device, this would be a
regulatory issue, because the sprom contains various power amplifier
calibration data. I think it should rather fail and be fixed correctly
instead of incorrectly using rev1 in that case.
--
Greetings Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-18 16:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-03 22:28 [PATCH] ssb: return -ENOMEM on alloc fail (instead of CRC check's result) Rafał Miłecki
2010-11-03 22:28 ` [PATCH] ssb: fail registration for unknown SPROM revision Rafał Miłecki
2010-11-03 22:36 ` Michael Büsch
2010-11-16 21:23 ` John W. Linville
2010-11-17 17:12 ` Michael Büsch
[not found] ` <20101118162748.GB2468@tuxdriver.com>
2010-11-18 16:35 ` Michael Büsch
2010-11-18 16:44 ` Rafał Miłecki
2010-11-18 16:47 ` Michael Büsch [this message]
2010-11-18 17:02 ` Larry Finger
2010-11-18 17:07 ` Michael Büsch
2010-11-18 17:29 ` Larry Finger
[not found] ` <20101118162617.GA2468@tuxdriver.com>
2010-11-18 16:35 ` Rafał Miłecki
2010-11-03 22:31 ` [PATCH] ssb: return -ENOMEM on alloc fail (instead of CRC check's result) Rafał Miłecki
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=1290098865.12596.6.camel@maggie \
--to=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=b43-dev@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).