Return-path: Received: from mail-ew0-f210.google.com ([209.85.219.210]:53385 "EHLO mail-ew0-f210.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754559AbZFKPIc convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:08:32 -0400 Received: by ewy6 with SMTP id 6so2101065ewy.37 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:08:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Florian Fainelli To: =?iso-8859-1?q?G=E1bor_Stefanik?= Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/7] wl12xx SDIO interface Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:08:28 +0200 Cc: Samuel Ortiz , Bob Copeland , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, pierre@ossman.eu, kalle.valo@iki.fi, san@google.com References: <1244685780-28930-1-git-send-email-me@bobcopeland.com> <200906111659.29575.florian@openwrt.org> <69e28c910906110804t23c50bdbs7e23f6dd604e977e@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <69e28c910906110804t23c50bdbs7e23f6dd604e977e@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200906111708.30481.florian@openwrt.org> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le Thursday 11 June 2009 17:04:01 G?bor Stefanik, vous avez ?crit?: > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > Le Thursday 11 June 2009 16:55:20 Samuel Ortiz, vous avez ?crit?: > >> On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 16:38 +0200, G?bor Stefanik wrote: > >> > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 4:02 AM, Bob Copeland wrote: > >> > > Here's v2 of the SDIO interface for wl12xx, still with a FIXME or > >> > > two. > >> > > > >> > > For my part, this is mainly a port of the Google/TI Android SDIO > >> > > interface logic to the existing SPI driver. ?I have confirmed that > >> > > the driver associates and sends some traffic. > >> > > > >> > > Pierre, hoping to get your perspective on the SDIO bits in patch 7, > >> > > since I very likely don't know what I'm doing :) ?Especially > >> > > regarding the platform code setup, in which the correct GPIOs have > >> > > to be written to turn on the device before probe will work. ?For the > >> > > SPI interface, we use spi_register_board_info() for a similar > >> > > purpose, but I'm not sure if there is a standard way to do that for > >> > > SDIO. ?This copies Google's platform driver for now. > >> > > > >> > > Conversion to readl/writel etc where appropriate is TODO. > >> > > > >> > > Bob Copeland (7): > >> > > ?wl12xx: separate bus i/o code into io.c > >> > > ?wl12xx: use wiphy_dev instead of wl->spi->dev > >> > > ?wl12xx: introduce wl12xx_if_operations struct > >> > > ?wl12xx: make wl12xx_set_partition bus agnostic > >> > > ?wl12xx: move module probe methods into spi.c > >> > > ?wl12xx: split spi interface into separate module > >> > > ?wl12xx: add sdio support > >> > > > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/Kconfig ?| ? 24 +++- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/Makefile | ? 10 +- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/acx.c ? ?| ? ?3 +- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/boot.c ? | ? ?3 +- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/cmd.c ? ?| ? 15 +- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/event.c ?| ? ?6 +- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/io.c ? ? | ?181 +++++++++++++++++++++ > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/io.h ? ? | ? 62 +++++++ > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/main.c ? | ?152 ++++-------------- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/ps.c ? ? | ? ?3 +- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/rx.c ? ? | ? 10 +- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/sdio.c ? | ?250 > >> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/spi.c ? ?| > >> > > 289 ++++++++++++++------------------- > >> > > drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/spi.h | ? 40 ----- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/tx.c ? ? | ? 64 ++++---- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/wl1251.c | ? ?9 +- > >> > > ?drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/wl12xx.h | ? 14 ++- > >> > > ?17 files changed, 752 insertions(+), 383 deletions(-) > >> > > ?create mode 100644 drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/io.c > >> > > ?create mode 100644 drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/io.h > >> > > ?create mode 100644 drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/sdio.c > >> > > >> > Can we expect vlynq any time soon? > >> > >> I guess we need: > >> > >> 1) A linux vlynq driver for that, and last thing I saw [1], it wasnt > >> really pretty/ready > > > > That driver is perfectly functionnal on a TI AR7 and we have used it in > > OpenWrt for months with the acx100/111 driver. What makes you think it is > > not yet ready ? There was a couple of suggestions from a TI employee, > > which are perfectly valid, but I have no hardware to implement what he is > > suggesting (no daisy chaining ...). > > Better forget the acx1xx driver. There is legal controversy around it > - the devs never released any documentation during the reverse > engineering process, and development was quite slow until TI's > copyrighted ti_ap.o driver's source code leaked... This is why I ask if wl12xx can actually drive an acx111 chipset or the HW is completely different. -- Best regards, Florian Fainelli Email : florian@openwrt.org http://openwrt.org -------------------------------