Re: [PATCH v2] b43: LP-PHY: Begin implementing calibration & software RFKILL support

[Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>]

On Monday 31 August 2009 21:38:28 Gábor Stefanik wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Michael Buesch<mb@bu3sch.de> wrote:
> > On Monday 31 August 2009 19:53:31 John W. Linville wrote:
> >> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 05:55:40PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> >> > On Sunday 30 August 2009 17:10:23 Larry Finger wrote:
> >> > > Michael Buesch wrote:
> >> > > > On Sunday 30 August 2009 02:15:55 Gábor Stefanik wrote:
> >> > > >>  static void lpphy_pr41573_workaround(struct b43_wldev *dev)
> >> > > >>  {
> >> > > >>        struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp;
> >> > > >> @@ -1357,28 +1488,440 @@ static void lpphy_pr41573_workaround(struct b43_wldev *dev)
> >> > > >>                b43_lptab_read_bulk(dev, B43_LPTAB32(7, 0x140),
> >> > > >>                                    saved_tab_size, saved_tab);
> >> > > >>        }
> >> > > >> +      b43_put_phy_into_reset(dev);
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Are you sure you really want this?
> >> > > > This function completely disables the PHY on the backplane and keeps the physical
> >> > > > PHY reset pin asserted (even after return from the function).
> >> > > > So the PHY will physically be powered down from this point on. The following
> >> > > > PHY accesses could even hang the machine, because the PHY won't respond to
> >> > > > register accesses anymore.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > We currently only use this function on A/G Multi-PHY devices to permanently
> >> > > > hard-disable the PHY that's not used.
> >> > >
> >> > > The PHY reset routine in
> >> > > http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/802.11/PHY/Reset, which I just updated
> >> > > for the latest N PHY changes, appears to be a different routine than
> >> > > b43_put_phy_into_reset(). The names are confusing.
> >> >
> >> > b43_put_phy_into_reset() is opencoded in the specifications in various init
> >> > routines. There's no separate specs page for that function.
> >> > But I think the code is straightforward and easy to understand.
> >>
> >> So is this patch right or not?  Should I hold onto it for 2.6.33
> >> (i.e. after the 2.6.32 merge window)?
> >
> > I'm pretty sure it's incorrect.
> >
> > --
> > Greetings, Michael.
> >
> 
> Do we have the correct reset routine implemented somewhere, or is it a
> new routine to add?
> 

We opencode something similar (N stuff and so on not included) in wireless_core_reset.
So we should probably implement http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/802.11/PHY/Reset
in a separate function and also call that from wireless_core_reset (and your workaround
code).

-- 
Greetings, Michael.