Return-path: <linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:36335 "EHLO
	mail-ww0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751829Ab1CRAjg convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 17 Mar 2011 20:39:36 -0400
Received: by wwa36 with SMTP id 36so4237280wwa.1
        for <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:39:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinPO7AFbtU2r4_8u99Vc7XQOYJ4==q+mWMtsapU@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1298635263-4883-1-git-send-email-vnatarajan@atheros.com>
	<AANLkTi=GPbB6EbWCGGjRupwsBLMaVt=ymO5hb9eU-Q+r@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinVaFcD8L9kOjPW-y7pVxR0ReHsLBy6=SG=8OJC@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinPO7AFbtU2r4_8u99Vc7XQOYJ4==q+mWMtsapU@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 06:09:35 +0530
Message-ID: <AANLkTim23a8sdY=-gPisxp2yiQC-0976qa1xEuMrc2CS@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ath9k_hw: Fix pcie_serdes setting for AR9485 1.1 version.
From: Vivek Natarajan <vivek.natraj@gmail.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com>
Cc: Vivek Natarajan <vnatarajan@atheros.com>,
	Sarvesh Shrivastava <sarvesh.shrivastava@atheros.com>,
	linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	Jack Lee <jack.lee@atheros.com>,
	Carl Huang <carl.huang@atheros.com>,
	David Quan <david.quan@atheros.com>,
	Nael Atallah <nael.atallah@atheros.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 4:01 AM, Vivek Natarajan <vnatarajan@atheros.com> wrote:
>>>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Natarajan <vnatarajan@atheros.com>
>>>
>>> Was this a stable fix? If not why not?
>>
>> This certainly smells like a stable fix
>
> OK so AR9485 1.1 support did not make it into 2.6.38, and this fix is
> applicable only to AR9485 1.1 so the patch in question is not
> applicable to stable. The 2.6.38 release however does have AR9485 1.0
> support. Will we have any devices in the field with AR9485 1.0 ? Did
> that revision not require a similar fix? On 2.6.38 and on linux-next I
> see we have for 1.0:
>
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?/* Awake Setting */
>
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?INIT_INI_ARRAY(&ah->iniPcieSerdes,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ar9485_1_0_pcie_phy_pll_on_clkreq_disable_L1,
>
> ARRAY_SIZE(ar9485_1_0_pcie_phy_pll_on_clkreq_disable_L1),
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?2);
>
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?/* Sleep Setting */
>
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?INIT_INI_ARRAY(&ah->iniPcieSerdesLowPower,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ar9485_1_0_pcie_phy_pll_on_clkreq_enable_L1,
>
> ARRAY_SIZE(ar9485_1_0_pcie_phy_pll_on_clkreq_enable_L1),
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?2);

We did not notice any issue with the older code atleast from my
testing. There was an error in porting the internal codebase for
AR9485 1.0 which is fixed by the above patch.

Thanks
Vivek.