2009-08-16 13:26:38

by Gábor Stefanik

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH] b43: LP-PHY: Update code for spec fixes, and fix a few typos

A few typos have been discovered both in the specs in and our code.
This patch fixes them.

Also use lpphy_op_switch_channel consistently, and make all callers
print its return value for easier debugging.

Signed-off-by: Gábor Stefanik <[email protected]>
---
I think using a forward declaration is justified in this case;
as avoiding the forward decl would require moving around huge
blocks of code, completely breaking any logical ordering.

drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_lp.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_lp.c b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_lp.c
index e4a040b..a51da6e 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_lp.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_lp.c
@@ -552,7 +552,7 @@ static void lpphy_2062_init(struct b43_wldev *dev)
B43_WARN_ON(!(bus->chipco.capabilities & SSB_CHIPCO_CAP_PMU));
B43_WARN_ON(crystalfreq == 0);

- if (crystalfreq >= 30000000) {
+ if (crystalfreq <= 30000000) {
lpphy->pdiv = 1;
b43_radio_mask(dev, B2062_S_RFPLL_CTL1, 0xFFFB);
} else {
@@ -560,14 +560,16 @@ static void lpphy_2062_init(struct b43_wldev *dev)
b43_radio_set(dev, B2062_S_RFPLL_CTL1, 0x4);
}

- tmp = (800000000 * lpphy->pdiv + crystalfreq) /
- (32000000 * lpphy->pdiv);
- tmp = (tmp - 1) & 0xFF;
+ tmp = (((800000000 * lpphy->pdiv + crystalfreq) /
+ (2 * crystalfreq)) - 8) & 0xFF;
+ b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_S_RFPLL_CTL7, tmp);
+
+ tmp = (((100 * crystalfreq + 16000000 * lpphy->pdiv) /
+ (32000000 * lpphy->pdiv)) - 1) & 0xFF;
b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_S_RFPLL_CTL18, tmp);

- tmp = (2 * crystalfreq + 1000000 * lpphy->pdiv) /
- (2000000 * lpphy->pdiv);
- tmp = ((tmp & 0xFF) - 1) & 0xFFFF;
+ tmp = (((2 * crystalfreq + 1000000 * lpphy->pdiv) /
+ (2000000 * lpphy->pdiv)) - 1) & 0xFF;
b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_S_RFPLL_CTL19, tmp);

ref = (1000 * lpphy->pdiv + 2 * crystalfreq) / (2000 * lpphy->pdiv);
@@ -671,7 +673,7 @@ static void lpphy_radio_init(struct b43_wldev *dev)
b43_phy_mask(dev, B43_LPPHY_FOURWIRE_CTL, 0xFFFD);
udelay(1);

- if (dev->phy.rev < 2) {
+ if (dev->phy.radio_ver == 0x2062) {
lpphy_2062_init(dev);
} else {
lpphy_2063_init(dev);
@@ -688,11 +690,18 @@ struct lpphy_iq_est { u32 iq_prod, i_pwr, q_pwr; };

static void lpphy_set_rc_cap(struct b43_wldev *dev)
{
- u8 rc_cap = dev->phy.lp->rc_cap;
+ struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp;

- b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_N_RXBB_CALIB2, max_t(u8, rc_cap-4, 0x80));
- b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_N_TX_CTL_A, ((rc_cap & 0x1F) >> 1) | 0x80);
- b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_S_RXG_CNT16, ((rc_cap & 0x1F) >> 2) | 0x80);
+ u8 rc_cap = (lpphy->rc_cap & 0x1F) >> 1;
+
+ if (dev->phy.rev == 1) //FIXME check channel 14!
+ rc_cap = max_t(u8, rc_cap + 5, 15);
+
+ b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_N_RXBB_CALIB2,
+ max_t(u8, lpphy->rc_cap - 4, 0x80));
+ b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_N_TX_CTL_A, rc_cap | 0x80);
+ b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_S_RXG_CNT16,
+ ((lpphy->rc_cap & 0x1F) >> 2) | 0x80);
}

static u8 lpphy_get_bb_mult(struct b43_wldev *dev)
@@ -1101,6 +1110,9 @@ static void lpphy_set_tx_power_control(struct b43_wldev *dev,
lpphy_write_tx_pctl_mode_to_hardware(dev);
}

+static int b43_lpphy_op_switch_channel(struct b43_wldev *dev,
+ unsigned int new_channel);
+
static void lpphy_rev0_1_rc_calib(struct b43_wldev *dev)
{
struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp;
@@ -1118,11 +1130,16 @@ static void lpphy_rev0_1_rc_calib(struct b43_wldev *dev)
old_rf2_ovr, old_rf2_ovrval, old_phy_ctl;
enum b43_lpphy_txpctl_mode old_txpctl;
u32 normal_pwr, ideal_pwr, mean_sq_pwr, tmp = 0, mean_sq_pwr_min = 0;
- int loopback, i, j, inner_sum;
+ int loopback, i, j, inner_sum, err;

memset(&iq_est, 0, sizeof(iq_est));

- b43_switch_channel(dev, 7);
+ err = b43_lpphy_op_switch_channel(dev, 7);
+ if (err) {
+ b43dbg(dev->wl,
+ "RC calib: Failed to switch to channel 7, error = %d",
+ err);
+ }
old_txg_ovr = (b43_phy_read(dev, B43_LPPHY_AFE_CTL_OVR) >> 6) & 1;
old_bbmult = lpphy_get_bb_mult(dev);
if (old_txg_ovr)
@@ -1881,14 +1898,14 @@ static int lpphy_b2062_tune(struct b43_wldev *dev,
{
struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp;
struct ssb_bus *bus = dev->dev->bus;
- static const struct b206x_channel *chandata = NULL;
+ const struct b206x_channel *chandata = NULL;
u32 crystal_freq = bus->chipco.pmu.crystalfreq * 1000;
u32 tmp1, tmp2, tmp3, tmp4, tmp5, tmp6, tmp7, tmp8, tmp9;
int i, err = 0;

- for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(b2063_chantbl); i++) {
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(b2062_chantbl); i++) {
if (b2063_chantbl[i].channel == channel) {
- chandata = &b2063_chantbl[i];
+ chandata = &b2062_chantbl[i];
break;
}
}
--
1.6.2.4





2009-08-16 14:38:09

by Larry Finger

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] b43: LP-PHY: Update code for spec fixes, and fix a few typos

Gábor Stefanik wrote:
> A few typos have been discovered both in the specs in and our code.
> This patch fixes them.
>
> Also use lpphy_op_switch_channel consistently, and make all callers
> print its return value for easier debugging.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gábor Stefanik <[email protected]>
> ---
> I think using a forward declaration is justified in this case;
> as avoiding the forward decl would require moving around huge
> blocks of code, completely breaking any logical ordering.
>
> drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_lp.c | 51
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> 1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_lp.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_lp.c
> index e4a040b..a51da6e 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_lp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_lp.c
> @@ -552,7 +552,7 @@ static void lpphy_2062_init(struct b43_wldev *dev)
> B43_WARN_ON(!(bus->chipco.capabilities & SSB_CHIPCO_CAP_PMU));
> B43_WARN_ON(crystalfreq == 0);
>
> - if (crystalfreq >= 30000000) {
> + if (crystalfreq <= 30000000) {
> lpphy->pdiv = 1;
> b43_radio_mask(dev, B2062_S_RFPLL_CTL1, 0xFFFB);
> } else {
> @@ -560,14 +560,16 @@ static void lpphy_2062_init(struct b43_wldev *dev)
> b43_radio_set(dev, B2062_S_RFPLL_CTL1, 0x4);
> }
>
> - tmp = (800000000 * lpphy->pdiv + crystalfreq) /
> - (32000000 * lpphy->pdiv);
> - tmp = (tmp - 1) & 0xFF;
> + tmp = (((800000000 * lpphy->pdiv + crystalfreq) /
> + (2 * crystalfreq)) - 8) & 0xFF;
> + b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_S_RFPLL_CTL7, tmp);
> +
> + tmp = (((100 * crystalfreq + 16000000 * lpphy->pdiv) /
> + (32000000 * lpphy->pdiv)) - 1) & 0xFF;
> b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_S_RFPLL_CTL18, tmp);
>
> - tmp = (2 * crystalfreq + 1000000 * lpphy->pdiv) /
> - (2000000 * lpphy->pdiv);
> - tmp = ((tmp & 0xFF) - 1) & 0xFFFF;
> + tmp = (((2 * crystalfreq + 1000000 * lpphy->pdiv) /
> + (2000000 * lpphy->pdiv)) - 1) & 0xFF;
> b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_S_RFPLL_CTL19, tmp);
>
> ref = (1000 * lpphy->pdiv + 2 * crystalfreq) / (2000 * lpphy->pdiv);
> @@ -671,7 +673,7 @@ static void lpphy_radio_init(struct b43_wldev *dev)
> b43_phy_mask(dev, B43_LPPHY_FOURWIRE_CTL, 0xFFFD);
> udelay(1);
>
> - if (dev->phy.rev < 2) {
> + if (dev->phy.radio_ver == 0x2062) {
> lpphy_2062_init(dev);
> } else {
> lpphy_2063_init(dev);
> @@ -688,11 +690,18 @@ struct lpphy_iq_est { u32 iq_prod, i_pwr, q_pwr; };
>
> static void lpphy_set_rc_cap(struct b43_wldev *dev)
> {
> - u8 rc_cap = dev->phy.lp->rc_cap;
> + struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp;
>
> - b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_N_RXBB_CALIB2, max_t(u8, rc_cap-4, 0x80));
> - b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_N_TX_CTL_A, ((rc_cap & 0x1F) >> 1) | 0x80);
> - b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_S_RXG_CNT16, ((rc_cap & 0x1F) >> 2) |
> 0x80);
> + u8 rc_cap = (lpphy->rc_cap & 0x1F) >> 1;
> +
> + if (dev->phy.rev == 1) //FIXME check channel 14!
> + rc_cap = max_t(u8, rc_cap + 5, 15);
> +
> + b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_N_RXBB_CALIB2,
> + max_t(u8, lpphy->rc_cap - 4, 0x80));
> + b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_N_TX_CTL_A, rc_cap | 0x80);
> + b43_radio_write(dev, B2062_S_RXG_CNT16,
> + ((lpphy->rc_cap & 0x1F) >> 2) | 0x80);
> }
>
> static u8 lpphy_get_bb_mult(struct b43_wldev *dev)
> @@ -1101,6 +1110,9 @@ static void lpphy_set_tx_power_control(struct
> b43_wldev *dev,
> lpphy_write_tx_pctl_mode_to_hardware(dev);
> }
>
> +static int b43_lpphy_op_switch_channel(struct b43_wldev *dev,
> + unsigned int new_channel);
> +
> static void lpphy_rev0_1_rc_calib(struct b43_wldev *dev)
> {
> struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp;
> @@ -1118,11 +1130,16 @@ static void lpphy_rev0_1_rc_calib(struct
> b43_wldev *dev)
> old_rf2_ovr, old_rf2_ovrval, old_phy_ctl;
> enum b43_lpphy_txpctl_mode old_txpctl;
> u32 normal_pwr, ideal_pwr, mean_sq_pwr, tmp = 0, mean_sq_pwr_min = 0;
> - int loopback, i, j, inner_sum;
> + int loopback, i, j, inner_sum, err;
>
> memset(&iq_est, 0, sizeof(iq_est));
>
> - b43_switch_channel(dev, 7);
> + err = b43_lpphy_op_switch_channel(dev, 7);
> + if (err) {
> + b43dbg(dev->wl,
> + "RC calib: Failed to switch to channel 7, error = %d",
> + err);
> + }
> old_txg_ovr = (b43_phy_read(dev, B43_LPPHY_AFE_CTL_OVR) >> 6) & 1;
> old_bbmult = lpphy_get_bb_mult(dev);
> if (old_txg_ovr)
> @@ -1881,14 +1898,14 @@ static int lpphy_b2062_tune(struct b43_wldev *dev,
> {
> struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp;
> struct ssb_bus *bus = dev->dev->bus;
> - static const struct b206x_channel *chandata = NULL;
> + const struct b206x_channel *chandata = NULL;
> u32 crystal_freq = bus->chipco.pmu.crystalfreq * 1000;
> u32 tmp1, tmp2, tmp3, tmp4, tmp5, tmp6, tmp7, tmp8, tmp9;
> int i, err = 0;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(b2063_chantbl); i++) {
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(b2062_chantbl); i++) {
> if (b2063_chantbl[i].channel == channel) {
-----
This should also be b2062. As long as the two tables have the same
channel ordering, this way would work.

> - chandata = &b2063_chantbl[i];
> + chandata = &b2062_chantbl[i];
> break;
> }
> }

Larry

2009-08-16 13:42:44

by Michael Büsch

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] b43: LP-PHY: Update code for spec fixes, and fix a few typos

On Sunday 16 August 2009 15:26:37 Gábor Stefanik wrote:
> A few typos have been discovered both in the specs in and our code.
> This patch fixes them.
>
> Also use lpphy_op_switch_channel consistently, and make all callers
> print its return value for easier debugging.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gábor Stefanik <[email protected]>
> ---
> I think using a forward declaration is justified in this case;
> as avoiding the forward decl would require moving around huge
> blocks of code, completely breaking any logical ordering.

I don't think so, but I'll ack this anyway.

--
Greetings, Michael.