From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-gw3-out.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.64]:35178 "EHLO mail-gw3-out.broadcom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751030AbbEHKTF (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2015 06:19:05 -0400 Message-ID: <554C8D96.9030205@broadcom.com> (sfid-20150508_121910_204408_53928B4D) Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 12:19:02 +0200 From: Arend van Spriel MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= CC: brcm80211 development , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC:rxctl wait timed out] brcmfmac: add BCM43526 USB support References: <1431030535-11083-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> <554C81D2.8080602@broadcom.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/08/15 11:53, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > On 8 May 2015 at 11:28, Arend van Spriel wrote: >> On 05/07/15 22:28, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >>> I'm trying to add BCM43526 support. This chipset can be found in: >>> 1) Some USB dongles, e.g. Tenda W900U uses revision 2 >>> 2) Some routers, e.g. Asus RT-AC53U uses revision 3+ >>> >>> Unfortunately attached patch doesn't seem to be enough, brcmfmac doesn't >>> work with my Tenda W900U. I keep getting following error: >>>> >>>> brcmfmac: brcmf_usb_recv_ctl Enter >>>> brcmf_usb_rx_ctlpkt: rxctl wait timed out >>>> brcmfmac: brcmf_fil_cmd_data Failed: -5 >>> >>> >>> It seems that: >>> 1) driver sends TX URB and gets completion callback called >>> 2) driver sents RX URB but it never gets completed >> >> Unfortunately this device is a BMAC device. You can tell by the 'high' word >> in the windows driver name. So there is no chance whatsoever to get this >> device going with brcmfmac. > > Oh damn, I was sure Broadcom dropped this design back in BCM43236 > times, I didn't even suspect newer chipsets may be still using it :( > Shit. Apparently this design is still in demand by our customers against all hopes. > Do you have any idea about BCM43526 rev 3+? The chipsets using 43526b > instead of 43526a. Any chance BCM43526 rev 3+ is normal FullMAC device > just like BCM43236 rev 3+? I don't know. Main thing needed for that is more on-chip memory, which makes it a bit more expensive. This may be a deal breaker for existing 43526 customers unless they like the fullmac advantages they get for their money. Regards, Arend