Return-path: Received: from ra.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.52]:4680 "EHLO ra.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936253AbXGZSfo (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:35:44 -0400 Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:13:34 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: Larry Finger Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de, Michael Buesch Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcm43xx-mac80211: Fix specs typo for baseband attenuation Message-ID: <20070726181334.GB6068@tuxdriver.com> References: <46a8ccbd.wNQamvQ9e0RJ0XZK%Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> <20070726172138.GA6068@tuxdriver.com> <46A8E044.6080206@lwfinger.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <46A8E044.6080206@lwfinger.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 12:56:20PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote: > John W. Linville wrote: > >On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 11:33:01AM -0500, Larry Finger wrote: > >>A typo in the specs interchanges the branches in an if statement, which > >>breaks operations for a BCM4306/rev 2 that has phy->analog == 1. > > > >>@@ -1895,7 +1895,7 @@ void bcm43xx_phy_set_baseband_attenuatio > >> bcm43xx_write16(dev, BCM43xx_MMIO_PHY0, > >> (bcm43xx_read16(dev, BCM43xx_MMIO_PHY0) > >> & 0xFFF0) | baseband_attenuation); > >>- } else if (phy->analog == 1) { > >>+ } else if (phy->analog != 1) { > >> bcm43xx_phy_write(dev, BCM43xx_PHY_DACCTL, > >> (bcm43xx_phy_read(dev, BCM43xx_PHY_DACCTL) > >> & 0xFFC3) | (baseband_attenuation << 2)); > > > >Larry, > > > >How does this relate to the bcm43xx patch you asked me to revert > >(and has been reverted in F-7)? That one change "==" to ">", while > >this one changes "==" to "!=". Instead of reverting the other, > >should it do the same thing as this? > > It really doesn't matter whether one uses ">" or "!=" here. The number in > question is >= 0 and the test for for zero occurs earlier in the routine > and ends with a return. Now that you mention it, it would be best to make > bcm43xx nad bcm43xx-mac80211 look the same. I'll modify and resubmit the > patch. Hmmm...well, if you asked to revert it on bcm43xx, why is it appropriate here? John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com