Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:35208 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753562AbZAWT5P (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:57:15 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] libertas: fix CF firmware loading for some cards From: Dan Williams To: Ryan Mallon Cc: "John W. Linville" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org, Holger Schurig , Cyril HAENEL , libertas-dev@lists.infradead.org In-Reply-To: <497AD344.5080900@bluewatersys.com> References: <1232729733.2577.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> <497AD344.5080900@bluewatersys.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:54:22 -0500 Message-Id: <1232740462.2577.48.camel@localhost.localdomain> (sfid-20090123_205720_102258_0D103D15) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, 2009-01-24 at 21:37 +1300, Ryan Mallon wrote: > Dan Williams wrote: > > if_cs_poll_while_fw_download() returned the number of iterations > > remaining on success, which in turn got returned as the value from > > if_cs_prog_real() and if_cs_prog_helper(). But since if_cs_probe() > > interprets non-zero return values from firmware load functions as an > > error, this sometimes caused spurious firmware load failures. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams > > --- > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/libertas/if_cs.c b/drivers/net/wireless/libertas/if_cs.c > > index 842a08d..8f8934a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/libertas/if_cs.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/libertas/if_cs.c > > @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ static int if_cs_poll_while_fw_download(struct if_cs_card *card, uint addr, u8 r > > for (i = 0; i < 100000; i++) { > > u8 val = if_cs_read8(card, addr); > > if (val == reg) > > - return i; > > + return 0; > > udelay(5); > > } > > return -ETIME; > > > > > > Hmmm, I posted this same patch here a couple of months ago > (http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/libertas-dev/2008-October/002019.html), > did I get something wrong in the submission process, or did it just get > lost in the woodwork? Anyway: Apparently I didn't read enough down that thread to find the second patch; I only found the one that changed if_cs_prog_helper() and if_cs_prog_real(). My mistake, this patch is yours. John; when you apply, please credit Ryan. Dan