Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:43140 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754729Ab0DZTPL (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Apr 2010 15:15:11 -0400 Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 15:09:11 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: Larry Finger Cc: =?utf-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH PING] ssb patches for SPROM location Message-ID: <20100426190911.GH2387@tuxdriver.com> References: <20100416133711.GB8554@tuxdriver.com> <4BC88EC4.5000606@lwfinger.net> <20100426182655.GE2387@tuxdriver.com> <4BD5E3A3.4050907@lwfinger.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: <4BD5E3A3.4050907@lwfinger.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 02:04:03PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote: > On 04/26/2010 01:33 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > > 2010/4/26 John W. Linville : > >> FWIW, this patch series also still results in a hang on my problematic > >> netbook. I'm going to merge them anyway, in hopes that they make > >> things better for someone (or at least get us closer to it). I'll try > >> to pinpoint this hang as well. > > > > Did it actually pick another (newly discovered) offset for SPROM > > location in your case? Could you add some single printk to check this? > > My suggestion is that for now we only implement John's patch for no > SPROM. I am hoping that we try to fix the failures for boxes with the > SPROM in a normal location. Once we do that, there will be a simpler fix > for testing at the alternate location. The patch will all be contained > in sprom_do_read(). Hmmm...well, I just pushed (just to my public trees, not to Dave) Rafał's trio of patches on top of mine. Should I revert them? John P.S. With those patches, this box (soon to be Larry's) still uses an sprom_offset value of 0x1000. -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.