From: "Michael Büsch" <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
b43-dev <b43-dev@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Notes on ssb specs and implementation
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:52:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1297723925.5683.11.camel@maggie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=ayavFKJw9s-n-AvMDrtMxXdDcjV+BnoxO-qkE@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20110214_233217_829894_FFFFFFFFD1071FC3)
On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 23:32 +0100, Rafa? Mi?ecki wrote:
> Sure. It's not for submission, so you have to expect magic values.
That patch doesn't look too bad.
> Personally I don't like for example description at
> http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/802.11/PHY . It's really messed in "Put
> PHY Into Reset".
> Section "Put PHY Into Reset" is really "How to reset PHY" and it
> duplicates code of takine PHY out of reset.
Yeah, well. Maybe I repeat myself for the hundredth time:
Do not duplicate the specifications exactly. Apply common sense before
implementing the code.
If we can do better on certain things, do it.
> We also have a lot of magic in ssb_device_enable. We reset SB and PHY
> at the same time. I guess it introduces some optimization but makes it
> harder to understand, especially if you try to understand implemented
> code and look as specs at the same time.
Well, it's core specific flags. I don't see anything
wrong here. I think the PHY reset might even require an actual core
reset to work correctly. So you could never untie both.
But that's exactly those magic things we're never going to find out
unless we have hardware documentation.
--
Greetings Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-14 22:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-09 20:00 Notes on ssb specs and implementation Rafał Miłecki
2011-02-09 20:17 ` Michael Büsch
2011-02-14 19:51 ` Rafał Miłecki
2011-02-14 22:01 ` Michael Büsch
2011-02-14 22:32 ` Rafał Miłecki
2011-02-14 22:52 ` Michael Büsch [this message]
2011-02-14 23:02 ` Rafał Miłecki
2011-02-14 23:08 ` Michael Büsch
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=1297723925.5683.11.camel@maggie \
--to=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=b43-dev@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--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).