From: Helmut Schaa <helmut.schaa@googlemail.com>
To: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] rt2x00: Align RT chipset definitions with vendor driver.
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 13:32:26 +0200
Cc: Gertjan van Wingerde <gwingerde@gmail.com>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	Ivo van Doorn <IvDoorn@gmail.com>,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, users@rt2x00.serialmonkey.com
References: <1270763437-29526-1-git-send-email-gwingerde@gmail.com> <4BBEB6E1.70300@gmail.com> <4BBEBE6B.20209@openwrt.org>
In-Reply-To: <4BBEBE6B.20209@openwrt.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Message-Id: <201004091332.26307.helmut.schaa@googlemail.com>
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Felix Fietkau:
> On 2010-04-09 7:10 AM, Gertjan van Wingerde wrote:
> > On 04/09/10 00:28, Felix Fietkau wrote:
> >> On 2010-04-08 11:50 PM, Gertjan van Wingerde wrote:
> >>> Only include definitions for RT chipsets that are also used inside the
> >>> Ralink vendor drivers.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Gertjan van Wingerde <gwingerde@gmail.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c |   13 -------------
> >>>  drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2x00.h    |    7 +++----
> >>>  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c
> >>> index 394c8e4..4bc7e09 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c
> >>> @@ -1209,10 +1209,7 @@ int rt2800_init_registers(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
> >>>  	rt2x00_set_field32(&reg, MAX_LEN_CFG_MAX_MPDU, AGGREGATION_SIZE);
> >>>  	if ((rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872) &&
> >>>  	     (rt2x00_rev(rt2x00dev) >= RT2880E_VERSION)) ||
> >>> -	    rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2880) ||
> >>>  	    rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2883) ||
> >>> -	    rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2890) ||
> >>> -	    rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3052) ||
> >>>  	    (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070) &&
> >>>  	     (rt2x00_rev(rt2x00dev) < RT3070_VERSION)))
> >>>  		rt2x00_set_field32(&reg, MAX_LEN_CFG_MAX_PSDU, 2);
> >>> @@ -1511,12 +1508,6 @@ int rt2800_init_bbp(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
> >>>  		rt2800_bbp_write(rt2x00dev, 105, 0x05);
> >>>  	}
> >>>  
> >>> -	if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3052)) {
> >>> -		rt2800_bbp_write(rt2x00dev, 31, 0x08);
> >>> -		rt2800_bbp_write(rt2x00dev, 78, 0x0e);
> >>> -		rt2800_bbp_write(rt2x00dev, 80, 0x08);
> >>> -	}
> >>> -
> >> Why are you removing support for RT3052? IMHO those writes were
> >> necessary, last time I tested the rt2800pci code on the RT3052 WiSoC.
> > 
> > That is because I have not been able to find them in any of the Ralink vendor drivers.
> > Actually, none of the Ralink vendor drivers mention an RT chipset that identifies itself
> > as a RT3052. The only mentioning Ive seen is RT305x devices that identify themselves as
> > RT2872 devices, but even for them I haven't found these BBP initializations.
> > That's why I removed this part.
> > 
> > I have no problem re-instating this if I can find some evidence that these devices
> > actually exist.
> These chipsets won't show up in STA-only drivers, because they belong to
> embedded APs. If you download GPL sources for devices such as ASUS
> RT-N15 you will find ifdefs for CONFIG_RALINK_RT3052 and the above
> values in BBPRegTable in the driver sources.
> I have a few devices based on RT3052, which is why I added this code.
> At some point I even had basic Rx/Tx working on it, but haven't tested
> in a while.

I also couldn't find any evidence of the existence of an 3052 _rt_ chipset.
However, the ralink drivers defines a 3052 _rf_ chip:

#define RFIC_3052                   9       // 2.4G/5G 2T2R

I don't have such an rf chip in my devices but I don't think the BPP
register setup should depend on the actual rf chip. So, if the register
setup is really needed we should maybe check for rt2x00_is_soc instead
of removing the code?

I couldn't test yet if the bpp register setup makes any difference here.

Helmut