[PATCH 0/2] ssb: updates matching specs, fix for hangs?

[PATCH 0/2] ssb: updates matching specs, fix for hangs?

[Rafał Miłecki]

John, I don't really know w-t policy, so please decide where we should apply
these patches. I'll try to provide some description.

We got reports of some devices hanging with ssb module, it was around SPROM
reading. AFAIK two patches are needed to fix this issue. One was already
posted by Larry: "ssb: Handle alternate SSPROM location" (however I can not
find it in w-t). Second one is attached patch for fast powerup delay.

Not sure about PMU init patch, I think it is needed to get devices working
but not sure if it affects (fixes) handing issue.

Fix of hanging sounds important and thankfully patches are quite trivial. On
the other hand we are at the end of merge window already. So please, help with
taking a decision about this.

CC-ing b43, hope it's OK.

Rafał Miłecki (2):
  ssb: update PMU init to match specs
  ssb: fast powerup delay calculation for PMU capable devices

 drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon.c     |   24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c |   17 +++++++----------
 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

[PATCH 1/2] ssb: update PMU init to match specs

[Rafał Miłecki]

Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c |   17 +++++++----------
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c b/drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c
index 3d55124..5732bb2 100644
--- a/drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c
+++ b/drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c
@@ -502,9 +502,9 @@ static void ssb_pmu_resources_init(struct ssb_chipcommon *cc)
 		chipco_write32(cc, SSB_CHIPCO_PMU_MAXRES_MSK, max_msk);
 }
 
+/* http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/802.11/SSB/PmuInit */
 void ssb_pmu_init(struct ssb_chipcommon *cc)
 {
-	struct ssb_bus *bus = cc->dev->bus;
 	u32 pmucap;
 
 	if (!(cc->capabilities & SSB_CHIPCO_CAP_PMU))
@@ -516,15 +516,12 @@ void ssb_pmu_init(struct ssb_chipcommon *cc)
 	ssb_dprintk(KERN_DEBUG PFX "Found rev %u PMU (capabilities 0x%08X)\n",
 		    cc->pmu.rev, pmucap);
 
-	if (cc->pmu.rev >= 1) {
-		if ((bus->chip_id == 0x4325) && (bus->chip_rev < 2)) {
-			chipco_mask32(cc, SSB_CHIPCO_PMU_CTL,
-				      ~SSB_CHIPCO_PMU_CTL_NOILPONW);
-		} else {
-			chipco_set32(cc, SSB_CHIPCO_PMU_CTL,
-				     SSB_CHIPCO_PMU_CTL_NOILPONW);
-		}
-	}
+	if (cc->pmu.rev == 1)
+		chipco_mask32(cc, SSB_CHIPCO_PMU_CTL,
+			      ~SSB_CHIPCO_PMU_CTL_NOILPONW);
+	else
+		chipco_set32(cc, SSB_CHIPCO_PMU_CTL,
+			     SSB_CHIPCO_PMU_CTL_NOILPONW);
 	ssb_pmu_pll_init(cc);
 	ssb_pmu_resources_init(cc);
 }
-- 
1.6.4.2

[PATCH 2/2] ssb: fast powerup delay calculation for PMU capable devices

[Rafał Miłecki]

Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Gábor Stefanik <netrolller.3d@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon.c |   24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon.c b/drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon.c
index 59ae76b..bda8514 100644
--- a/drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon.c
+++ b/drivers/ssb/driver_chipcommon.c
@@ -209,6 +209,24 @@ static void chipco_powercontrol_init(struct ssb_chipcommon *cc)
 	}
 }
 
+/* http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/802.11/PmuFastPwrupDelay */
+static u16 pmu_fast_powerup_delay(struct ssb_chipcommon *cc)
+{
+	struct ssb_bus *bus = cc->dev->bus;
+
+	switch (bus->chip_id) {
+	case 0x4312:
+	case 0x4322:
+	case 0x4328:
+		return 7000;
+	case 0x4325:
+		/* TODO: */
+	default:
+		return 15000;
+	}
+}
+
+/* http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/802.11/ClkctlFastPwrupDelay */
 static void calc_fast_powerup_delay(struct ssb_chipcommon *cc)
 {
 	struct ssb_bus *bus = cc->dev->bus;
@@ -218,6 +236,12 @@ static void calc_fast_powerup_delay(struct ssb_chipcommon *cc)
 
 	if (bus->bustype != SSB_BUSTYPE_PCI)
 		return;
+
+	if (cc->capabilities & SSB_CHIPCO_CAP_PMU) {
+		cc->fast_pwrup_delay = pmu_fast_powerup_delay(cc);
+		return;
+	}
+
 	if (!(cc->capabilities & SSB_CHIPCO_CAP_PCTL))
 		return;
 
-- 
1.6.4.2

Re: [PATCH 0/2] ssb: updates matching specs, fix for hangs?

[Rafał Miłecki]

W dniu 24 maja 2010 21:50 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> napisał:
> John, I don't really know w-t policy, so please decide where we should apply
> these patches. I'll try to provide some description.

John, I think you missed that two patches. It was already some time
ago, but AFAIR there wasn't any reason against commiting them, am I
wrong here?

-- 
Rafał

Re: [PATCH 0/2] ssb: updates matching specs, fix for hangs?

[Hauke Mehrtens]

Am 20.06.2010 14:34, schrieb Rafał Miłecki:
> W dniu 24 maja 2010 21:50 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> napisał:
>> John, I don't really know w-t policy, so please decide where we should apply
>> these patches. I'll try to provide some description.
> 
> John, I think you missed that two patches. It was already some time
> ago, but AFAIR there wasn't any reason against commiting them, am I
> wrong here?
> 
Hi Rafał,

They are aleardy in the wireless-next-2.6 tree and in linux-next:

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-next-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=fd515941cfaf949b55086a36943afe085d7268e6

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-next-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=c35deb4e70d52ed564c58569fe059dd7ca5f4eec

Hauke

Re: [PATCH 0/2] ssb: updates matching specs, fix for hangs?

[Rafał Miłecki]

W dniu 20 czerwca 2010 14:41 użytkownik Hauke Mehrtens
<hauke@hauke-m.de> napisał:
> Am 20.06.2010 14:34, schrieb Rafał Miłecki:
>> W dniu 24 maja 2010 21:50 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> napisał:
>>> John, I don't really know w-t policy, so please decide where we should apply
>>> these patches. I'll try to provide some description.
>>
>> John, I think you missed that two patches. It was already some time
>> ago, but AFAIR there wasn't any reason against commiting them, am I
>> wrong here?
>>
> Hi Rafał,
>
> They are aleardy in the wireless-next-2.6 tree and in linux-next:
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-next-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=fd515941cfaf949b55086a36943afe085d7268e6
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-next-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=c35deb4e70d52ed564c58569fe059dd7ca5f4eec

Whoops, OK, thanks for pointing. I just checked Linus's git and
wireless-testing.

-- 
Rafał

Re: [PATCH 0/2] ssb: updates matching specs, fix for hangs?

[John W. Linville]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 02:56:09PM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> W dniu 20 czerwca 2010 14:41 użytkownik Hauke Mehrtens
> <hauke@hauke-m.de> napisał:
> > Am 20.06.2010 14:34, schrieb Rafał Miłecki:
> >> W dniu 24 maja 2010 21:50 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> napisał:
> >>> John, I don't really know w-t policy, so please decide where we should apply
> >>> these patches. I'll try to provide some description.
> >>
> >> John, I think you missed that two patches. It was already some time
> >> ago, but AFAIR there wasn't any reason against commiting them, am I
> >> wrong here?
> >>
> > Hi Rafał,
> >
> > They are aleardy in the wireless-next-2.6 tree and in linux-next:
> >
> > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-next-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=fd515941cfaf949b55086a36943afe085d7268e6
> >
> > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-next-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=c35deb4e70d52ed564c58569fe059dd7ca5f4eec
> 
> Whoops, OK, thanks for pointing. I just checked Linus's git and
> wireless-testing.

Must not have checked the latter too closely, since the exact same
commits are there as well... :-)

John
-- 
John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com			might be all we have.  Be ready.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] ssb: updates matching specs, fix for hangs?

[Rafał Miłecki]

W dniu 20 czerwca 2010 18:20 użytkownik John W. Linville
<linville@tuxdriver.com> napisał:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 02:56:09PM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> W dniu 20 czerwca 2010 14:41 użytkownik Hauke Mehrtens
>> <hauke@hauke-m.de> napisał:
>> > Am 20.06.2010 14:34, schrieb Rafał Miłecki:
>> >> W dniu 24 maja 2010 21:50 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> napisał:
>> >>> John, I don't really know w-t policy, so please decide where we should apply
>> >>> these patches. I'll try to provide some description.
>> >>
>> >> John, I think you missed that two patches. It was already some time
>> >> ago, but AFAIR there wasn't any reason against commiting them, am I
>> >> wrong here?
>> >>
>> > Hi Rafał,
>> >
>> > They are aleardy in the wireless-next-2.6 tree and in linux-next:
>> >
>> > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-next-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=fd515941cfaf949b55086a36943afe085d7268e6
>> >
>> > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-next-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=c35deb4e70d52ed564c58569fe059dd7ca5f4eec
>>
>> Whoops, OK, thanks for pointing. I just checked Linus's git and
>> wireless-testing.
>
> Must not have checked the latter too closely, since the exact same
> commits are there as well... :-)

Oh, that's right! Sorry for noise :)

-- 
Rafał