Return-path: Received: from server19320154104.serverpool.info ([193.201.54.104]:41307 "EHLO hauke-m.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757139Ab2BWV1r (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2012 16:27:47 -0500 Message-ID: <4F46AF41.6060803@hauke-m.de> (sfid-20120223_222800_256848_17D4E099) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 22:27:29 +0100 From: Hauke Mehrtens MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= CC: linville@tuxdriver.com, b43-dev@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, arend@broadcom.com, m@bues.ch Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] ssb: sprom fix some sizes / signedness References: <1329676345-15856-1-git-send-email-hauke@hauke-m.de> <1329676345-15856-2-git-send-email-hauke@hauke-m.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 02/23/2012 07:14 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > 2012/2/19 Hauke Mehrtens : >> @@ -53,10 +53,10 @@ struct ssb_sprom { >> u8 gpio1; /* GPIO pin 1 */ >> u8 gpio2; /* GPIO pin 2 */ >> u8 gpio3; /* GPIO pin 3 */ >> - u16 maxpwr_bg; /* 2.4GHz Amplifier Max Power (in dBm Q5.2) */ >> - u16 maxpwr_al; /* 5.2GHz Amplifier Max Power (in dBm Q5.2) */ >> - u16 maxpwr_a; /* 5.3GHz Amplifier Max Power (in dBm Q5.2) */ >> - u16 maxpwr_ah; /* 5.8GHz Amplifier Max Power (in dBm Q5.2) */ >> + u8 maxpwr_bg; /* 2.4GHz Amplifier Max Power (in dBm Q5.2) */ >> + u8 maxpwr_al; /* 5.2GHz Amplifier Max Power (in dBm Q5.2) */ >> + u8 maxpwr_a; /* 5.3GHz Amplifier Max Power (in dBm Q5.2) */ >> + u8 maxpwr_ah; /* 5.8GHz Amplifier Max Power (in dBm Q5.2) */ >> u8 itssi_a; /* Idle TSSI Target for A-PHY */ >> u8 itssi_bg; /* Idle TSSI Target for B/G-PHY */ >> u8 tri2g; /* 2.4GHz TX isolation */ > > Just a note in case you're going to develop ssb/bcma/b43/brcm code. > Please note we're trying to switch from properties you modified to > struct ssb_sprom_core_pwr_info. These vars are available in sprom 1-3,8,9 and the ones in struct ssb_sprom_core_pwr_info just for sprom 4,5,8,9. The old are probably not used by newer chips any more. I just found these because I generated my parsing code from broadcom open source code and got a compiler warning because of wrong sizes. > > The patch still looks fine. >