Different revisions of WUSB54GC-EU use different chipsets -
v2 uses rtl8187, but v3 uses Ralink RT3070.
Signed-off-by: Marcin Slusarz <[email protected]>
Cc: Przemyslaw Kulczycki <[email protected]>
Cc: John W. Linville <[email protected]>
Cc: Linux wireless <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig b/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
index 5bc00db..7d5902d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
@@ -431,7 +431,7 @@ config RTL8187
ASUS P5B Deluxe
Toshiba Satellite Pro series of laptops
Asus Wireless Link
- Linksys WUSB54GC-EU
+ Linksys WUSB54GC-EU v2
Thanks to Realtek for their support!
--
1.6.3.3
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Marcin Slusarz<[email protected]> wrote:
> Different revisions of WUSB54GC-EU use different chipsets -
> v2 uses rtl8187, but v3 uses Ralink RT3070.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcin Slusarz <[email protected]>
> Cc: Przemyslaw Kulczycki <[email protected]>
> Cc: John W. Linville <[email protected]>
> Cc: Linux wireless <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig b/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
> index 5bc00db..7d5902d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
> @@ -431,7 +431,7 @@ config RTL8187
> ASUS P5B Deluxe
> Toshiba Satellite Pro series of laptops
> Asus Wireless Link
> - Linksys WUSB54GC-EU
> + Linksys WUSB54GC-EU v2
Is there a v1, and what does it use?
>
> Thanks to Realtek for their support!
>
> --
> 1.6.3.3
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Marcin Slusarz<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Different revisions of WUSB54GC-EU use different chipsets -
>> v2 uses rtl8187, but v3 uses Ralink RT3070.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marcin Slusarz <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Przemyslaw Kulczycki <[email protected]>
>> Cc: John W. Linville <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Linux wireless <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig | 2 +-
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig b/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
>> index 5bc00db..7d5902d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
>> @@ -431,7 +431,7 @@ config RTL8187
>> ASUS P5B Deluxe
>> Toshiba Satellite Pro series of laptops
>> Asus Wireless Link
>> - Linksys WUSB54GC-EU
>> + Linksys WUSB54GC-EU v2
>
> Is there a v1, and what does it use?
I don't know.
Marcin
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Marcin Slusarz<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
>> Is there a v1, and what does it use?
>
> I don't know.
2009/7/8 G?bor Stefanik <[email protected]>:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Hin-Tak Leung<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Is there a v1, and what does it use?
>
> I have the v1, it is rt73-based. (v3 is rt2070, not rt3070, though.)
I guess I have two questions: (1) are the 3 variants labelled in that
way as such v1/v2/v3 (on the box,
or one of the USB device identity queries)? (2) are they distinguished
by different product IDs?
The point is that the commit (which only changes the help message) is
only appropriate if they are labelled as v1/v2/v3 and not
distinguished by different product IDs. If they are distinguished by
different product IDs and the current codes for the three drivers bind
correctly to each, then the change is only relevant to people who
manually build their kernel and want to build one driver but not the
others. (i.e. instead of distros which ship the full set of driver
modules). Which goes to my first question...
if they are not labelled v1/v2/v3 as such, it may be more
useful/informative to change to
[some variant of ] ... [(other variants are supported by the
rt2070/rt3070 modules)]
instead of just adding [v2] to the end.
Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
>
> if they are not labelled v1/v2/v3 as such, it may be more
> useful/informative to change to
>
> [some variant of ] ... [(other variants are supported by the
> rt2070/rt3070 modules)]
>
> instead of just adding [v2] to the end.
I don't know about the box as I bought mine used on Ebay, but the
label on the device clearly states that it is a WG111v2.
Larry
2009/7/9 Larry Finger <[email protected]>:
> Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
>>
>> if they are not labelled v1/v2/v3 as such, it may be more
>> useful/informative to change to
>>
>> [some variant of ] ... [(other variants are supported by the
>> rt2070/rt3070 modules)]
>>
>> instead of just adding [v2] to the end.
>
> I don't know about the box as I bought mine used on Ebay, but the
> label on the device clearly states that it is a WG111v2.
>
> Larry
>
>
But that's a Netgear WG111v2 ? We are talking about Linksys
WUSB54GC-EU and its v1/v2/v3 . I am just thinking that if it is for
informative purposes (for those who actually selectively build their
kernel modules), adding a bit more info, such as suggesting to use
rt73usb/rt2070/rt3070 modules, won't hurt.
Incidentally I like to know a bit more about this patch - presumably
Marcin has such a device? I am also a little curious, as this commit
should be accompanied by a corresponding update in another Kconfig
which supports the device? I am not trying to be picky, but for an
informative (non-code-changing) patch, it can be more informative.
Hin-Tak Leung pisze:
> 2009/7/9 Larry Finger <[email protected]>:
>> Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
>>> if they are not labelled v1/v2/v3 as such, it may be more
>>> useful/informative to change to
>>>
>>> [some variant of ] ... [(other variants are supported by the
>>> rt2070/rt3070 modules)]
>>>
>>> instead of just adding [v2] to the end.
>> I don't know about the box as I bought mine used on Ebay, but the
>> label on the device clearly states that it is a WG111v2.
>>
>> Larry
>>
>>
>
> But that's a Netgear WG111v2 ? We are talking about Linksys
> WUSB54GC-EU and its v1/v2/v3 . I am just thinking that if it is for
> informative purposes (for those who actually selectively build their
> kernel modules), adding a bit more info, such as suggesting to use
> rt73usb/rt2070/rt3070 modules, won't hurt.
>
> Incidentally I like to know a bit more about this patch - presumably
> Marcin has such a device? I am also a little curious, as this commit
> should be accompanied by a corresponding update in another Kconfig
> which supports the device? I am not trying to be picky, but for an
> informative (non-code-changing) patch, it can be more informative.
I have a v3 device and this driver does not support it.
Below is the commit which added the string my patch corrects.
I've sent yesterday another patch which adds support for WUSB54GC v3
to the rt3070 driver.
commit aeeab4ff06b8e29cfe2fe730ba626f7e2487ba03
Author: John W. Linville <[email protected]>
Date: Wed May 27 09:21:57 2009 +0200
rtl8187: add USB ID for Linksys WUSB54GC-EU v2 USB wifi dongle
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13383
Reported-by: Przemyslaw Kulczycki <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <[email protected]>
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig b/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
index 8a08235..3d94e7d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
@@ -430,6 +430,7 @@ config RTL8187
ASUS P5B Deluxe
Toshiba Satellite Pro series of laptops
Asus Wireless Link
+ Linksys WUSB54GC-EU
Thanks to Realtek for their support!
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rtl818x/rtl8187_dev.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rtl818x/rtl8187_dev.c
index bac6cfb..d51ba0a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/rtl818x/rtl8187_dev.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rtl818x/rtl8187_dev.c
@@ -71,6 +71,8 @@ static struct usb_device_id rtl8187_table[] __devinitdata = {
{USB_DEVICE(0x18E8, 0x6232), .driver_info = DEVICE_RTL8187},
/* AirLive */
{USB_DEVICE(0x1b75, 0x8187), .driver_info = DEVICE_RTL8187},
+ /* Linksys */
+ {USB_DEVICE(0x1737, 0x0073), .driver_info = DEVICE_RTL8187B},
{}
};
2009/7/9 Marcin Slusarz <[email protected]>:
> Hin-Tak Leung pisze:
>> 2009/7/9 Larry Finger <[email protected]>:
>>> Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
>>>> if they are not labelled v1/v2/v3 as such, it may be more
>>>> useful/informative to change to
>>>>
>>>> [some variant of ] ... [(other variants are supported by the
>>>> rt2070/rt3070 modules)]
>>>>
>>>> instead of just adding [v2] to the end.
>>> I don't know about the box as I bought mine used on Ebay, but the
>>> label on the device clearly states that it is a WG111v2.
>>>
>>> Larry
>>>
>>>
>>
>> But that's a Netgear WG111v2 ? We are talking about Linksys
>> WUSB54GC-EU and its v1/v2/v3 . I am just thinking that if it is for
>> informative purposes (for those who actually selectively build their
>> kernel modules), adding a bit more info, such as suggesting to use
>> rt73usb/rt2070/rt3070 modules, won't hurt.
>>
>> Incidentally I like to know a bit more about this patch - presumably
>> Marcin has such a device? I am also a little curious, as this commit
>> should be accompanied by a corresponding update in another Kconfig
>> which supports the device? I am not trying to be picky, but for an
>> informative (non-code-changing) patch, it can be more informative.
>
> I have a v3 device and this driver does not support it.
> Below is the commit which added the string my patch corrects.
> I've sent yesterday another patch which adds support for WUSB54GC v3
> to the rt3070 driver.
Here is some info from Gabor (shouldn't this be reply-all rather than just me):
------------------
The v1 and v2 look identical (though the label on the device indicates
the revision). The v3 looks completely different. They all have
different USB IDs (v1 is stock RT73, v2 has a custom ID, while v3 is
AFAIK stock RT2070).
------------------
I guess to be informative, may I suggest adding '(for v1 see rt73usb,
and v3 see rt3070)' or something similiar to the 'v2' change?
It is fair customary in Kconfig to mention even alternative/competing
drivers for the same device. And when you add v3 support to the rt3070
driver, a reverse mention may be appropriate. (I guess I am spending
far too long on this discussion - but I reckon, the purpose of a
non-code-changing change is meant to be informative, so one might want
to be as informative as appropriate without being too wordy...)
>
> commit aeeab4ff06b8e29cfe2fe730ba626f7e2487ba03
> Author: John W. Linville <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed May 27 09:21:57 2009 +0200
>
> rtl8187: add USB ID for Linksys WUSB54GC-EU v2 USB wifi dongle
>
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13383
>
> Reported-by: Przemyslaw Kulczycki <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <[email protected]>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig b/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
> index 8a08235..3d94e7d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
> @@ -430,6 +430,7 @@ config RTL8187
> ASUS P5B Deluxe
> Toshiba Satellite Pro series of laptops
> Asus Wireless Link
> + Linksys WUSB54GC-EU
>
> Thanks to Realtek for their support!
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rtl818x/rtl8187_dev.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rtl818x/rtl8187_dev.c
> index bac6cfb..d51ba0a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/rtl818x/rtl8187_dev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rtl818x/rtl8187_dev.c
> @@ -71,6 +71,8 @@ static struct usb_device_id rtl8187_table[] __devinitdata = {
> {USB_DEVICE(0x18E8, 0x6232), .driver_info = DEVICE_RTL8187},
> /* AirLive */
> {USB_DEVICE(0x1b75, 0x8187), .driver_info = DEVICE_RTL8187},
> + /* Linksys */
> + {USB_DEVICE(0x1737, 0x0073), .driver_info = DEVICE_RTL8187B},
> {}
> };
>
>
>
>
2009/7/9 Hin-Tak Leung <[email protected]>:
> Here is some info from Gabor (shouldn't this be reply-all rather than just me):
> ------------------
> The v1 and v2 look identical (though the label on the device indicates
> the revision). The v3 looks completely different. They all have
> different USB IDs (v1 is stock RT73, v2 has a custom ID, while v3 is
> AFAIK stock RT2070).
> ------------------
>
> I guess to be informative, may I suggest adding '(for v1 ?see rt73usb,
> and v3 see rt3070)' or something similiar to the 'v2' change?
> It is fair customary in Kconfig to mention even alternative/competing
> drivers for the same device. And when you add v3 support to the rt3070
> driver, a reverse mention may be appropriate. (I guess I am spending
> far too long on this discussion - but I reckon, the purpose of a
> non-code-changing change is meant to be informative, so one might want
> to be as informative as appropriate without being too wordy...)
>
Yes, sorry, it was intended to be reply-to-all, but Gmail's
default-reply-to-all feature appears to be broken.
--
Vista: [V]iruses, [I]ntruders, [S]pyware, [T]rojans and [A]dware. :-)
Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
> 2009/7/9 Marcin Slusarz <[email protected]>:
>> Hin-Tak Leung pisze:
>>> 2009/7/9 Larry Finger <[email protected]>:
>>>> Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
>>>>> if they are not labelled v1/v2/v3 as such, it may be more
>>>>> useful/informative to change to
>>>>>
>>>>> [some variant of ] ... [(other variants are supported by the
>>>>> rt2070/rt3070 modules)]
>>>>>
>>>>> instead of just adding [v2] to the end.
>>>> I don't know about the box as I bought mine used on Ebay, but the
>>>> label on the device clearly states that it is a WG111v2.
>>>>
>>>> Larry
>>>>
>>>>
>>> But that's a Netgear WG111v2 ? We are talking about Linksys
>>> WUSB54GC-EU and its v1/v2/v3 . I am just thinking that if it is for
>>> informative purposes (for those who actually selectively build their
>>> kernel modules), adding a bit more info, such as suggesting to use
>>> rt73usb/rt2070/rt3070 modules, won't hurt.
>>>
>>> Incidentally I like to know a bit more about this patch - presumably
>>> Marcin has such a device? I am also a little curious, as this commit
>>> should be accompanied by a corresponding update in another Kconfig
>>> which supports the device? I am not trying to be picky, but for an
>>> informative (non-code-changing) patch, it can be more informative.
>> I have a v3 device and this driver does not support it.
>> Below is the commit which added the string my patch corrects.
>> I've sent yesterday another patch which adds support for WUSB54GC v3
>> to the rt3070 driver.
>
> Here is some info from Gabor (shouldn't this be reply-all rather than just me):
> ------------------
> The v1 and v2 look identical (though the label on the device indicates
> the revision). The v3 looks completely different. They all have
> different USB IDs (v1 is stock RT73, v2 has a custom ID, while v3 is
> AFAIK stock RT2070).
> ------------------
>
> I guess to be informative, may I suggest adding '(for v1 see rt73usb,
> and v3 see rt3070)' or something similiar to the 'v2' change?
> It is fair customary in Kconfig to mention even alternative/competing
> drivers for the same device. And when you add v3 support to the rt3070
> driver, a reverse mention may be appropriate. (I guess I am spending
> far too long on this discussion - but I reckon, the purpose of a
> non-code-changing change is meant to be informative, so one might want
> to be as informative as appropriate without being too wordy...)
Look, support for Ralink chipsets is a mess. They are supported by too sets
of drivers - Ralink's ugly as hell but working staging drivers (rt2860,
rt2870, rt3070, soon rt3090) and properly developed but lagging rt2x00
drivers (RT2400PCI, RT2500PCI, RT61PCI, RT2500USB, RT73USB, RT2800USB).
Theoretically my WUSB54GCv3 is supported by RT2800USB (which was added during
2.6.31 merge window), but it doesn't work. With tiny patch added to rt3070
(just usb id) my card works. Some day rt2x00 drivers will be better than Ralink's,
but right now they are not.
So I wouldn't like to encourage any of them. I just wanted to fix clearly
wrong help text which stated that rtl8187 (Realtek's chipset!) supports
all WUSB54GC cards.
Marcin
2009/7/9 Marcin Slusarz <[email protected]>:
> Look, support for Ralink chipsets is a mess. They are supported by too sets
> of drivers - Ralink's ugly as hell but working staging drivers (rt2860,
> rt2870, rt3070, soon rt3090) and properly developed but lagging rt2x00
> drivers (RT2400PCI, RT2500PCI, RT61PCI, RT2500USB, RT73USB, RT2800USB).
>
> Theoretically my WUSB54GCv3 is supported by RT2800USB (which was added during
> 2.6.31 merge window), but it doesn't work. With tiny patch added to rt3070
> (just usb id) my card works. Some day rt2x00 drivers will be better than Ralink's,
> but right now they are not.
>
> So I wouldn't like to encourage any of them. I just wanted to fix clearly
> wrong help text which stated that rtl8187 (Realtek's chipset!) supports
> all WUSB54GC cards.
I think you mis-read the Kconfig message. GPL clause 11:
...PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE...
The linux kernel never claim to cover *all* of anything, and in
particular, the message you refers to is meant to read '*some*
WUSB54GC are known to work', YMMV. I think adding pointers/info to v1
and3 would be better if you want to add 'v2' to it; particularly since
Gabor has pointed out that v1/v2/v3 all have different USB ids and a
full set of kernel modules will bind to the different devices
correctly, so the message is only for people who has a new/unknown
device and want to experiment (and expect to have some failures). And
to be honest, there is a device called rtl8187se, which isn't an
rtl8187 at all and don't have much in common. If you start insisting
the rtl8187 Kconfig message should have an extra 5 letters say 'not
se', I would rather you say 'rtl8187se is covered by ..., which is in
staging phase'. (the se driver is, the last time I heard, in staging
and not working and nobody is working on it to make it work, which is
worse than your situation).
The situation with Ralink drivers isn't that different in other
vendors - Realtek provides a vendor driver for rtl8187 called "r8187"
and there is a community driver rtl8187; Atheros provides a vendor
driver for Zydas zd1211 and there is a community driver zd1211rw. I
don't think this "wouldn't like to encourage any of them" attitude is
helping anybody. In both of the Realtek case and the Zydas case,
people tolerated the co-existences of both (and sometimes with
ndiswrapper also) for many months and studied the vendor drivers (+
ndiswrapper) and eventually improve the community driver.
Driver codes don't grow on trees - if you 'wouldn't like to encourage
any of them', maybe you should not be using linux at all.