Subject: Re: Notes on ssb specs and implementation
From: Michael =?ISO-8859-1?Q?B=FCsch?= <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Rafa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki?= <zajec5@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
	b43-dev <b43-dev@lists.infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimfTt7kiwtSiPfE0kYRXwgHXJPAv19xuiv-M=NG@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20110209_210017_862769_37B0C3E4)
References: <AANLkTimfTt7kiwtSiPfE0kYRXwgHXJPAv19xuiv-M=NG@mail.gmail.com>
	 (sfid-20110209_210017_862769_37B0C3E4)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 21:17:01 +0100
Message-ID: <1297282621.9734.5.camel@maggie>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 21:00 +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote: 
> Michael: was there any reasons why we didn't implement some parts of
> core-disabling code?

The function are complete as of latest reverse engineering efforts.
Broadcom added stuff, if they do more stuff in latest code.

> Michael: should we care about the way wl sets core specific flags? I
> didn't dig into that moment in MMIO dumps, but as ssb_device_enable
> implementation ignores flags at the end, it has to set flags somehow
> differently on it's own.

I have no idea. ssb_device_enable is very hairy and I'm not going
to touch it without good reason and regression testing.

You didn't tell us the important part: Does changing ssb_device_enable
make it work?

-- 
Greetings Michael.