Return-path: Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.173]:1629 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752873AbXJULiH (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Oct 2007 07:38:07 -0400 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id z38so790359ugc for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2007 04:38:05 -0700 (PDT) To: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [Rt2400-devel] rt73usb: support for wireless in Kohjinsha subnotebook Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 15:56:29 +0200 Cc: rt2400-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, kernel list , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, mwallis@serialmonkey.com References: <20071020184100.GA11640@elf.ucw.cz> <200710210012.37547.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <20071021092048.GA25270@elf.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20071021092048.GA25270@elf.ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200710211556.29469.IvDoorn@gmail.com> (sfid-20071021_123821_215500_8ED0ACC5) From: Ivo van Doorn Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, > > If rt2x00 is loaded and detected the device, it should print out a debug message that starts with: > > "Chipset detected - " What is in your case the complete line? > > Ok, I guess I should include more complete debug output. > > phy0 -> rt2x00usb_vendor_request: Error - Vendor Request 0x09 failed for offset 0x0000 with error -32 - Vendor requests error with the -32 errors often indicate the incorrect device. > phy0 -> rt73usb_validate_eeprom: EEPROM recover - MAC: 66:76:2b:e8:68:e7 - Incorrect MAC address read from the device. Another hint that the device is not rt73. > phy0 -> rt2x00usb_vendor_request: Error - Vendor Request 0x07 failed for offset 0x3000 with error -32 > phy0 -> rt2x00_set_chip: Info - Chipset detected - rt: 1300, rf: 0000, rev: c03c0ae0 - A incorrect RF chipset. (valid values are: 1, 2, 3 or 4). Another indication of a incorrect device. - A completely bogus chipset revision. A valid rt73 device has the revision "2573X" Where only the X is a variable. > phy0 -> rt73usb_init_eeprom: Error - Invalid RF chipset detected > > ...so, I think hardware is indeed quite similar to what rt73usb driver > expects...? No. You can assume you are forcing rt73 to control a non-rt73 device. The fact that you had to hack to bypass the RT and RF chipset validation also confirms that, those checks were there for a reason. Namely to make sure the corect driver was being used for the device. Ivo