For the firmware version 5.30.17 the log file shows:
Firmware version 5.30.11
The variable softSubVer is binary.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu CASTET <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jose Alonso <[email protected]>
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 15:14 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 03:42:54PM +0100, matthieu castet wrote:
> > For the firmware version 5.30.17 the log file shows:
> > Firmware version 5.30.11
> >
> > The variable softSubVer is binary.
> >
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Matthieu CASTET <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Jose Alonso <[email protected]>
>
> > Index: airo.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- 1/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c (r?vision 47)
> > +++ 2/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c (r?vision 48)
> > @@ -2993,7 +2993,7 @@
> > ai->wep_capable = (cap_rid.softCap & cpu_to_le16(0x02)) ? 1 : 0;
> > ai->max_wep_idx = (cap_rid.softCap & cpu_to_le16(0x80)) ? 3 : 0;
> >
> > - airo_print_info(dev->name, "Firmware version %x.%x.%02x",
> > + airo_print_info(dev->name, "Firmware version %x.%x.%02d",
> > ((le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) >> 8) & 0xF),
> > (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) & 0xFF),
> > le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softSubVer));
>
> Why should the last segment be in decimal form if the other two
> segments of the version number are in hexadecimal form?
The airo.c shows the usage of hexadecimal and binary form:
/* Test for WPA support */
/* Only firmware versions 5.30.17 or better can do WPA */
if (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) > 0x530
|| (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) == 0x530
&& le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softSubVer) >= 17)) {
airo_print_info(ai->dev->name, "WPA supported.");
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 08:06 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 21:20 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 08:12:53PM -0300, Jose Alonso wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 15:14 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 03:42:54PM +0100, matthieu castet wrote:
> > > > > For the firmware version 5.30.17 the log file shows:
> > > > > Firmware version 5.30.11
> > > > >
> > > > > The variable softSubVer is binary.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Matthieu CASTET <[email protected]>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jose Alonso <[email protected]>
> > > >
> > > > > Index: airo.c
> > > > > ===================================================================
> > > > > --- 1/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c (r?vision 47)
> > > > > +++ 2/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c (r?vision 48)
> > > > > @@ -2993,7 +2993,7 @@
> > > > > ai->wep_capable = (cap_rid.softCap & cpu_to_le16(0x02)) ? 1 : 0;
> > > > > ai->max_wep_idx = (cap_rid.softCap & cpu_to_le16(0x80)) ? 3 : 0;
> > > > >
> > > > > - airo_print_info(dev->name, "Firmware version %x.%x.%02x",
> > > > > + airo_print_info(dev->name, "Firmware version %x.%x.%02d",
> > > > > ((le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) >> 8) & 0xF),
> > > > > (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) & 0xFF),
> > > > > le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softSubVer));
> > > >
> > > > Why should the last segment be in decimal form if the other two
> > > > segments of the version number are in hexadecimal form?
> > >
> > > The airo.c shows the usage of hexadecimal and binary form:
> > >
> > > /* Test for WPA support */
> > > /* Only firmware versions 5.30.17 or better can do WPA */
> > > if (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) > 0x530
> > > || (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) == 0x530
> > > && le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softSubVer) >= 17)) {
> > > airo_print_info(ai->dev->name, "WPA supported.");
> >
> > Alright, but that could be an argument for changing the comment.
> > Probably too much to ask, but is there some authoritative source for
> > this busted numbering scheme?
>
> Not really, you flash a certain known version of firmware onto the
> device in Windows, then see what Linux supports. I'll see if I can
> check my card out and see what I come up with.
s/supports/reports.
Dan
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 21:20 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 08:12:53PM -0300, Jose Alonso wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 15:14 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 03:42:54PM +0100, matthieu castet wrote:
> > > > For the firmware version 5.30.17 the log file shows:
> > > > Firmware version 5.30.11
> > > >
> > > > The variable softSubVer is binary.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Matthieu CASTET <[email protected]>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jose Alonso <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > > Index: airo.c
> > > > ===================================================================
> > > > --- 1/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c (r?vision 47)
> > > > +++ 2/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c (r?vision 48)
> > > > @@ -2993,7 +2993,7 @@
> > > > ai->wep_capable = (cap_rid.softCap & cpu_to_le16(0x02)) ? 1 : 0;
> > > > ai->max_wep_idx = (cap_rid.softCap & cpu_to_le16(0x80)) ? 3 : 0;
> > > >
> > > > - airo_print_info(dev->name, "Firmware version %x.%x.%02x",
> > > > + airo_print_info(dev->name, "Firmware version %x.%x.%02d",
> > > > ((le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) >> 8) & 0xF),
> > > > (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) & 0xFF),
> > > > le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softSubVer));
> > >
> > > Why should the last segment be in decimal form if the other two
> > > segments of the version number are in hexadecimal form?
> >
> > The airo.c shows the usage of hexadecimal and binary form:
> >
> > /* Test for WPA support */
> > /* Only firmware versions 5.30.17 or better can do WPA */
> > if (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) > 0x530
> > || (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) == 0x530
> > && le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softSubVer) >= 17)) {
> > airo_print_info(ai->dev->name, "WPA supported.");
>
> Alright, but that could be an argument for changing the comment.
> Probably too much to ask, but is there some authoritative source for
> this busted numbering scheme?
Not really, you flash a certain known version of firmware onto the
device in Windows, then see what Linux supports. I'll see if I can
check my card out and see what I come up with.
Dan
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 08:12:53PM -0300, Jose Alonso wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 15:14 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 03:42:54PM +0100, matthieu castet wrote:
> > > For the firmware version 5.30.17 the log file shows:
> > > Firmware version 5.30.11
> > >
> > > The variable softSubVer is binary.
> > >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Matthieu CASTET <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Jose Alonso <[email protected]>
> >
> > > Index: airo.c
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- 1/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c (r?vision 47)
> > > +++ 2/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c (r?vision 48)
> > > @@ -2993,7 +2993,7 @@
> > > ai->wep_capable = (cap_rid.softCap & cpu_to_le16(0x02)) ? 1 : 0;
> > > ai->max_wep_idx = (cap_rid.softCap & cpu_to_le16(0x80)) ? 3 : 0;
> > >
> > > - airo_print_info(dev->name, "Firmware version %x.%x.%02x",
> > > + airo_print_info(dev->name, "Firmware version %x.%x.%02d",
> > > ((le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) >> 8) & 0xF),
> > > (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) & 0xFF),
> > > le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softSubVer));
> >
> > Why should the last segment be in decimal form if the other two
> > segments of the version number are in hexadecimal form?
>
> The airo.c shows the usage of hexadecimal and binary form:
>
> /* Test for WPA support */
> /* Only firmware versions 5.30.17 or better can do WPA */
> if (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) > 0x530
> || (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) == 0x530
> && le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softSubVer) >= 17)) {
> airo_print_info(ai->dev->name, "WPA supported.");
Alright, but that could be an argument for changing the comment.
Probably too much to ask, but is there some authoritative source for
this busted numbering scheme?
John
--
John W. Linville ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Someday the world will need a hero, and you
[email protected] ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?might be all we have. ?Be ready.
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 03:42:54PM +0100, matthieu castet wrote:
> For the firmware version 5.30.17 the log file shows:
> Firmware version 5.30.11
>
> The variable softSubVer is binary.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthieu CASTET <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jose Alonso <[email protected]>
> Index: airo.c
> ===================================================================
> --- 1/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c (r?vision 47)
> +++ 2/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c (r?vision 48)
> @@ -2993,7 +2993,7 @@
> ai->wep_capable = (cap_rid.softCap & cpu_to_le16(0x02)) ? 1 : 0;
> ai->max_wep_idx = (cap_rid.softCap & cpu_to_le16(0x80)) ? 3 : 0;
>
> - airo_print_info(dev->name, "Firmware version %x.%x.%02x",
> + airo_print_info(dev->name, "Firmware version %x.%x.%02d",
> ((le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) >> 8) & 0xF),
> (le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softVer) & 0xFF),
> le16_to_cpu(cap_rid.softSubVer));
Why should the last segment be in decimal form if the other two
segments of the version number are in hexadecimal form?
John
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
[email protected] might be all we have. Be ready.