From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 20:51:54 +0100 Subject: Notes on ssb specs and implementation In-Reply-To: <1297282621.9734.5.camel@maggie> References: <1297282621.9734.5.camel@maggie> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: =?UTF-8?Q?Michael_B=C3=BCsch?= Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Larry Finger , b43-dev W dniu 9 lutego 2011 21:17 u?ytkownik Michael B?sch napisa?: > On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 21:00 +0100, Rafa? Mi?ecki wrote: >> Michael: was there any reasons why we didn't implement some parts of >> core-disabling code? > > The function are complete as of latest reverse engineering efforts. > Broadcom added stuff, if they do more stuff in latest code. Nothing has changed in specs since 2006: http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/Backplane?action=info For some reason routines that were present even in 2006 was not implemented. >> Michael: should we care about the way wl sets core specific flags? I >> didn't dig into that moment in MMIO dumps, but as ssb_device_enable >> implementation ignores flags at the end, it has to set flags somehow >> differently on it's own. > > I have no idea. ssb_device_enable is very hairy and I'm not going > to touch it without good reason and regression testing. > > You didn't tell us the important part: Does changing ssb_device_enable > make it work? I've just written missing parts, tested and it still does not work :| The only advantage discovered so far is that ssb detects sth is wrong with IM state: [ 2661.449647] ssb: Timeout waiting for bitmask 01800000 on register 0F90 to clear. I can see wl experiencing the same problems after loading b43. It reads 0xf90 dozen of times in a row. -- Rafa?