Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKoLU8P3MyauCUevcRHtzMj8HSZQLD-hYyEaZyRH9OfLye6knQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20200110132142.7737-1-denis281089@gmail.com> <aab66c75-49ae-0955-03a8-f817685b0925@nbd.name>
 <CAKoLU8P3MyauCUevcRHtzMj8HSZQLD-hYyEaZyRH9OfLye6knQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Tom Psyborg <pozega.tomislav@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Jan 2020 03:52:28 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKR_QVKb21WWbUup-O9nsDvfVO7-c_+Kpxx3n8=b1e4X5pkmkw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ath9k: fix firmware bug in some Mikrotik R11e-2HPnD cards
To:     Denis Kalashnikov <denis281089@gmail.com>
Cc:     Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 13/01/2020, Denis Kalashnikov <denis281089@gmail.com> wrote:
> I read value from the SREV register of AR9582 -- got 0x001c04ff. I
> looked through the code of ath9k and found out that in this case the
> revision is 4. So, since AR_SREV_REVISION_9580_10 is defined as 4, I
> logically concluded that AR_SREV_9580_10 would do the job. But you
> suspicions turned to be right. I tested AR9580 now and it has the same
> value as AR9582 in the SREV register -- 0x001c04ff. PCI Subsystem ID
> is zero on those Mikrotik cards, so it is not useful. Felix, guys, may
> be somebody have any thoughts how we can distinguish AR9582? Or that a
> chip has only 2 chains? May be values from other registers?
>

read MAC OUI any apply only to mikrotik ones?