From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
To: Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@iki.fi>
Cc: Pierre Ossman <pierre@ossman.eu>,
Bob Copeland <me@bobcopeland.com>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, san@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 7/7] wl12xx: add sdio support
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 22:24:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1244924647.1852.10.camel@violet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <873aa3opsr.fsf@litku.valot.fi>
Hi Kalle,
> >> wl1251 has these lines to the host:
> >>
> >> o four lines for SDIO or SPI, configured to SDIO by default
> >> o power line
> >> o interrupt line
> >>
> >> When the power line is pulled up, the chip will power on itself.
> >> Whenever the power line goes down, the chip will power off. For example,
> >> the power line can be controlled with a GPIO pin from the host. But how
> >> the power line is really controlled, is board specific and should be
> >> handled in the board file. And here comes the set_power() function to
> >> the picture. The wl1251 driver will call set_power() function every time
> >> user space calls wlan interface up or down.
> >>
> >> Pierre, how do you propose we should do this? I understood based on
> >> discussions from linux-omap that this is a common way.
> >
> > actually this looks like a RFKILL hard switch to me.
>
> I have my doubts. For example, when you turn off and on the power from
> the wl1251 chip you have to reupload the firmware and boot it again,
> which is slow. I have been thinking more like turning off the radios
> when rfkill is enabled, which is significantly faster. But I haven't
> looked at rfkill yet, and I'm not planning to do it until the dust has
> settled within the next few months :)
>
> > Why don't we just integrate it with RFKILL and this way have a common
> > interface to handle all of these.
>
> But rfkill won't solve the problem under discussion. rfkill is the
> interface between wl12xx driver and higher levels, but the problem here
> is the lower level interface, that is how does wl12xx driver shall
> control the actual hw line. We need to have a generic way to control the
> hw line so that driver works in TI's OMAP architecture, whatever Google
> is using and all the other possible (embedded) combination where Linux
> can run.
>
> Because I know that my english sucks, I'll draw an architecture diagram
> to show what I'm trying to say here:
>
> ---------- ------------
> | rfkill | | mac80211 |
> ---------- ------------
>
> -----------------------
> | wl12xx |
> -----------------------
>
> -----------------------
> | hw power line |
> -----------------------
>
> So rfkill is on the opposite side of wl12xx compared to the actual hw
> power line.
we do have the RFKILL (aka soft killswitch) that is now integrated with
mac80211 and we do have separate RFKILL hardware killswitches.
For example the Bluetooth pieces inside a laptop now have a Bluetooth
hardware killswitch (behind a platform device) and the soft killswitch
from the Bluetooth subsystem. They are two independent pieces.
RFKILL is a confusing beast ;)
Regards
Marcel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-13 20:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-11 2:02 [PATCH/RFC 0/7] wl12xx SDIO interface Bob Copeland
2009-06-11 2:02 ` [PATCH/RFC 1/7] wl12xx: separate bus i/o code into io.c Bob Copeland
2009-06-11 2:02 ` [PATCH/RFC 2/7] wl12xx: use wiphy_dev instead of wl->spi->dev Bob Copeland
2009-06-11 2:02 ` [PATCH/RFC 3/7] wl12xx: introduce wl12xx_if_operations struct Bob Copeland
2009-06-11 2:02 ` [PATCH/RFC 4/7] wl12xx: make wl12xx_set_partition bus agnostic Bob Copeland
2009-06-11 2:02 ` [PATCH/RFC 5/7] wl12xx: move module probe methods into spi.c Bob Copeland
2009-06-11 2:02 ` [PATCH/RFC 6/7] wl12xx: split spi interface into separate module Bob Copeland
2009-06-11 2:03 ` [PATCH/RFC 7/7] wl12xx: add sdio support Bob Copeland
2009-06-13 11:21 ` Pierre Ossman
2009-06-13 16:00 ` Kalle Valo
2009-06-13 19:41 ` Marcel Holtmann
2009-06-13 20:13 ` Kalle Valo
2009-06-13 20:24 ` Marcel Holtmann [this message]
2009-06-13 20:44 ` Kalle Valo
2009-06-13 20:09 ` Pierre Ossman
2009-06-13 20:57 ` Bob Copeland
2009-06-18 2:25 ` Bob Copeland
2009-06-19 19:24 ` Pierre Ossman
2009-06-19 20:31 ` Bob Copeland
2009-06-20 4:29 ` Kalle Valo
2009-06-21 18:38 ` Pierre Ossman
2009-06-22 0:05 ` Bob Copeland
2009-06-22 6:09 ` Pierre Ossman
2009-06-22 6:14 ` Pierre Ossman
2009-06-23 2:18 ` Bob Copeland
2009-07-15 7:12 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2009-07-15 12:08 ` Bob Copeland
2009-06-11 14:38 ` [PATCH/RFC 0/7] wl12xx SDIO interface Gábor Stefanik
2009-06-11 14:54 ` Florian Fainelli
2009-06-11 17:06 ` Bob Copeland
2009-06-11 14:55 ` Samuel Ortiz
2009-06-11 14:59 ` Florian Fainelli
2009-06-11 15:04 ` Gábor Stefanik
2009-06-11 15:08 ` Florian Fainelli
2009-06-11 15:03 ` Samuel Ortiz
2009-06-11 15:54 ` Kalle Valo
2009-06-11 17:08 ` Bob Copeland
2009-06-11 17:14 ` Kalle Valo
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=1244924647.1852.10.camel@violet \
--to=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=kalle.valo@iki.fi \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=me@bobcopeland.com \
--cc=pierre@ossman.eu \
--cc=san@google.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