Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f223.google.com ([209.85.220.223]:34742 "EHLO mail-fx0-f223.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752527Ab0C2VxW (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:53:22 -0400 Received: by fxm23 with SMTP id 23so1261851fxm.21 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:53:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4BB12148.7080309@googlemail.com> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 23:53:12 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6kgQm9sbGRvcmY=?= MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Larry Finger CC: "John W. Linville" , wireless Subject: Re: [BUG] No SPROM available! References: <4BB0FD96.5020402@lwfinger.net> <4BB10110.9090202@googlemail.com> <20100329194745.GH4984@tuxdriver.com> <4BB10A0F.1030608@lwfinger.net> <20100329204822.GL4984@tuxdriver.com> <20100329205558.GM4984@tuxdriver.com> <4BB11B8E.1020506@lwfinger.net> In-Reply-To: <4BB11B8E.1020506@lwfinger.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/29/10 23:28, Larry Finger wrote: > On 03/29/2010 03:55 PM, John W. Linville wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 04:48:22PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: >>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 03:14:07PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote: >>> >>>> Could you please apply my little test patch and send me the contents of the >>>> chipcommon status register in your netbook? >>> >>> Mine looks like yours, "chip_id 0x4312, status 0x12"... >> >> I guess I misread the earlier messages -- mine looks like Ren�'s, not yours. > > Bummer. To answer your previous message, the Broadcom driver is very clear that > 0x2 set in the chipcommon status for a BCM4312 means no SPROM; however, Ren�'s > device contradicts that conclusion. There must be some other test that I have > missed. > > Ren�: For your information, this test was added because attempting to read the > SPROM in John's computer locks the processor - he has to power off. I did > reverse engineering on the Broadcom driver and found their workaround when no > SPROM is present. The patch in question matches their code, and allows John's > machine to continue. There is a second, pending patch that works with some udev > rules to create a virtual SPROM image and assign a unique MAC address. With this > patch applied, your machine would still work. The only change is that you would > be assigned a random MAC address. > > I will likely need some additional test prints to see if I can find a test that > recognizes that Ren�'s machine has an SPROMs and that John's does not. > > Larry Ok, if I can help you, write me. I will help you testing patches and give you certain information if you need.