Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <[email protected]>
---
John: this one depends on
[RFC][PATCH] b43: HT-PHY: allow writing longer tables with a single call
, please apply the one above.
---
drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_ht.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_ht.c b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_ht.c
index 80c448d..81c8656 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_ht.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/phy_ht.c
@@ -352,18 +352,45 @@ static int b43_phy_ht_op_init(struct b43_wldev *dev)
b43_phy_write(dev, 0x0b9, 0x0072);
- /* TODO: Some ops here */
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(7, 0x14e), 2, 0x010f, 0x010f);
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(7, 0x15e), 2, 0x010f, 0x010f);
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(7, 0x16e), 2, 0x010f, 0x010f);
b43_phy_ht_afe_unk1(dev);
- /* TODO: Some ops here */
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(7, 0x130), 9, 0x777, 0x111, 0x111,
+ 0x777, 0x111, 0x111, 0x777, 0x111, 0x111);
+
+ b43_httab_write(dev, B43_HTTAB16(7, 0x120), 0x0777);
+ b43_httab_write(dev, B43_HTTAB16(7, 0x124), 0x0777);
+
+ b43_httab_write(dev, B43_HTTAB16(8, 0x00), 0x02);
+ b43_httab_write(dev, B43_HTTAB16(8, 0x10), 0x02);
+ b43_httab_write(dev, B43_HTTAB16(8, 0x20), 0x02);
+
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(8, 0x08), 4,
+ 0x8e, 0x96, 0x96, 0x96);
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(8, 0x18), 4,
+ 0x8f, 0x9f, 0x9f, 0x9f);
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(8, 0x28), 4,
+ 0x8f, 0x9f, 0x9f, 0x9f);
+
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(8, 0x0c), 4, 0x2, 0x2, 0x2, 0x2);
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(8, 0x1c), 4, 0x2, 0x2, 0x2, 0x2);
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(8, 0x2c), 4, 0x2, 0x2, 0x2, 0x2);
b43_phy_maskset(dev, 0x0280, 0xff00, 0x3e);
b43_phy_maskset(dev, 0x0283, 0xff00, 0x3e);
b43_phy_maskset(dev, B43_PHY_OFDM(0x0141), 0xff00, 0x46);
b43_phy_maskset(dev, 0x0283, 0xff00, 0x40);
- /* TODO: Some ops here */
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(00, 0x8), 4,
+ 0x09, 0x0e, 0x13, 0x18);
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(01, 0x8), 4,
+ 0x09, 0x0e, 0x13, 0x18);
+ /* TODO: Did wl mean 2 instead of 40? */
+ b43_httab_write_few(dev, B43_HTTAB16(40, 0x8), 4,
+ 0x09, 0x0e, 0x13, 0x18);
b43_phy_maskset(dev, B43_PHY_OFDM(0x24), 0x3f, 0xd);
b43_phy_maskset(dev, B43_PHY_OFDM(0x64), 0x3f, 0xd);
--
1.7.3.4
On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 09:49 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> Please, _please_, _PLEASE_ stop doing this. I process a lot of
> patches, and sometimes I will miss these directives.
Best just to publish a git tree which John can pull in to
wireless-testing.git, much as trees get pulled to linux-next.
That way it'll *always* have the patches you want, in the order you
want.
--
dwmw2
W dniu 23 sierpnia 2011 15:49 użytkownik John W. Linville
<[email protected]> napisał:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 02:45:51PM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> W dniu 13 sierpnia 2011 17:54 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki
>> <[email protected]> napisał:
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <[email protected]>
>> > ---
>> > John: this one depends on
>> > [RFC][PATCH] b43: HT-PHY: allow writing longer tables with a single call
>> > , please apply the one above.
>>
>> John, I've asked you to apply the mentioned patch before this one. By
>> applying *just* this one you've broken build for ppl trying *BROKEN*
>> HT support.
>
> Please, _please_, _PLEASE_ stop doing this. I process a lot of
> patches, and sometimes I will miss these directives.
>
> If your patch is not RFC, then don't post it as RFC. If you post
> a patch as "Request For Comment" and I don't have any comments,
> I'm going to delete it. If you later decide it is no longer RFC,
> then I've probably already deleted it. So you need to re-post the
> patch as just "PATCH".
>
> I no longer have "b43: HT-PHY: allow writing longer tables with a
> single call". If it is needed, then you need to repost it.
Sorry, I didn't know about this "RFC" rule. I expected patch to be
applied after spending a few days without comments. Will re-send in
the future.
--
Rafał
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 02:45:51PM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> W dniu 13 sierpnia 2011 17:54 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki
> <[email protected]> napisał:
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > John: this one depends on
> > [RFC][PATCH] b43: HT-PHY: allow writing longer tables with a single call
> > , please apply the one above.
>
> John, I've asked you to apply the mentioned patch before this one. By
> applying *just* this one you've broken build for ppl trying *BROKEN*
> HT support.
Please, _please_, _PLEASE_ stop doing this. I process a lot of
patches, and sometimes I will miss these directives.
If your patch is not RFC, then don't post it as RFC. If you post
a patch as "Request For Comment" and I don't have any comments,
I'm going to delete it. If you later decide it is no longer RFC,
then I've probably already deleted it. So you need to re-post the
patch as just "PATCH".
I no longer have "b43: HT-PHY: allow writing longer tables with a
single call". If it is needed, then you need to repost it.
John
P.S. In general, it is best to post patches with dependencies as a series.
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
[email protected] might be all we have. Be ready.
David Woodhouse <[email protected]> writes:
> On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 09:49 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
>> Please, _please_, _PLEASE_ stop doing this. I process a lot of
>> patches, and sometimes I will miss these directives.
>
> Best just to publish a git tree which John can pull in to
> wireless-testing.git, much as trees get pulled to linux-next.
>
> That way it'll *always* have the patches you want, in the order you
> want.
That's true, but setting up git tree for wireless is not trivial and
not for the faint of heart. Especially due to differences between
wireless-next and wireless-testing. Sending a patch series is a lot
easier and causes less tears.
--
Kalle Valo
W dniu 13 sierpnia 2011 17:54 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki
<[email protected]> napisał:
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <[email protected]>
> ---
> John: this one depends on
> [RFC][PATCH] b43: HT-PHY: allow writing longer tables with a single call
> , please apply the one above.
John, I've asked you to apply the mentioned patch before this one. By
applying *just* this one you've broken build for ppl trying *BROKEN*
HT support.
--
Rafał
On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 20:56 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
> That's true, but setting up git tree for wireless is not trivial and
> not for the faint of heart. Especially due to differences between
> wireless-next and wireless-testing. Sending a patch series is a lot
> easier and causes less tears.
Most of the time it wouldn't need to be based on wireless-testing. It
could just be based on Linus's last release. If wireless-next is
actually a real stable git tree, it could perhaps be based on that too.
--
dwmw2