rt2x00: rt2800lib: Fix rx path on SoC devices

PATCH In review Helmut Schaa 3 participants 10 messages Apr 26, 2010 – Apr 27, 2010 Networking drivers (wireless)

Share & tools

Helmut Schaa

author

2010-04-26 11:54 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 rt2x00: rt2800lib: Fix rx path on SoC devices

Restore the rfcsr initialization for RT305x SoC devices which was removed by "rt2x00: Finish rt3070 support in rt2800 register initialization.".

This fixes the rx path on SoC devices.

Signed-off-by Helmut Schaa <[email protected]>

---
 drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c |   34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +33 -1

index 2648f31..1358d9a 100644
@@ -1703,7 +1703,8 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 	if (!rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3071) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3090) &&
-	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390))
+	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390) &&
+	    !(rt2x00_is_soc(rt2x00dev) && rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)))
 		return 0;
 
 	/*

@@ -1771,6 +1772,37 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x8f);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 30, 0x20);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 31, 0x0f);
+	} else if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)) {
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 0, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 1, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 2, 0xf7);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 3, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 4, 0x40);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 5, 0x03);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 6, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 7, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 8, 0x39);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 9, 0x0f);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 10, 0x60);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 11, 0x21);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 12, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 13, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 14, 0x90);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 15, 0x58);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 16, 0xb3);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 17, 0x92);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 18, 0x2c);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 19, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 20, 0xba);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 21, 0xdb);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 22, 0x00);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 23, 0x31);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 24, 0x08);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 25, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 26, 0x25);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 27, 0x23);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 28, 0x13);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x83);
 	}
 
 	if (rt2x00_rt_rev_lt(rt2x00dev, RT3070, REV_RT3070F)) {

Signature · 1 line

1.6.4.2

Gertjan van Wingerde

2010-04-26 19:55 UTC #1 lore raw

Quoted 6 lines · Helmut Schaa

Restore the rfcsr initialization for RT305x SoC devices which was removed by "rt2x00: Finish rt3070 support in rt2800 register initialization.".
This fixes the rx path on SoC devices.
Signed-off-by Helmut Schaa <[email protected]>

I'm checking the Ralink code for these SoC devices. Until I've finished that I'll wait with giving my Ack.

Quoted 56 lines

---
 drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c |   34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +33 -1

index 2648f31..1358d9a 100644
@@ -1703,7 +1703,8 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 	if (!rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3071) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3090) &&
-	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390))
+	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390) &&
+	    !(rt2x00_is_soc(rt2x00dev) && rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)))
 		return 0;
 
 	/*

@@ -1771,6 +1772,37 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x8f);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 30, 0x20);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 31, 0x0f);
+	} else if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)) {
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 0, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 1, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 2, 0xf7);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 3, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 4, 0x40);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 5, 0x03);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 6, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 7, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 8, 0x39);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 9, 0x0f);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 10, 0x60);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 11, 0x21);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 12, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 13, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 14, 0x90);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 15, 0x58);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 16, 0xb3);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 17, 0x92);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 18, 0x2c);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 19, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 20, 0xba);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 21, 0xdb);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 22, 0x00);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 23, 0x31);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 24, 0x08);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 25, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 26, 0x25);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 27, 0x23);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 28, 0x13);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x83);
 	}
 
 	if (rt2x00_rt_rev_lt(rt2x00dev, RT3070, REV_RT3070F)) {

Helmut Schaa

author

2010-04-26 19:57 UTC #2 lore raw

Am Montag 26 April 2010 schrieb Gertjan van Wingerde:

Quoted 10 lines · Helmut Schaa

Quoted 6 lines
Restore the rfcsr initialization for RT305x SoC devices which was removed by "rt2x00: Finish rt3070 support in rt2800 register initialization.".
This fixes the rx path on SoC devices.
Signed-off-by Helmut Schaa <[email protected]>
I'm checking the Ralink code for these SoC devices. Until I've finished that I'll wait with giving my Ack.

Sure.

Quoted 58 lines

Quoted 56 lines

---
 drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c |   34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +33 -1

index 2648f31..1358d9a 100644
@@ -1703,7 +1703,8 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 	if (!rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3071) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3090) &&
-	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390))
+	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390) &&
+	    !(rt2x00_is_soc(rt2x00dev) && rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)))
 		return 0;
 
 	/*

@@ -1771,6 +1772,37 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x8f);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 30, 0x20);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 31, 0x0f);
+	} else if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)) {
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 0, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 1, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 2, 0xf7);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 3, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 4, 0x40);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 5, 0x03);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 6, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 7, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 8, 0x39);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 9, 0x0f);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 10, 0x60);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 11, 0x21);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 12, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 13, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 14, 0x90);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 15, 0x58);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 16, 0xb3);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 17, 0x92);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 18, 0x2c);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 19, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 20, 0xba);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 21, 0xdb);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 22, 0x00);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 23, 0x31);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 24, 0x08);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 25, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 26, 0x25);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 27, 0x23);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 28, 0x13);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x83);
 	}
 
 	if (rt2x00_rt_rev_lt(rt2x00dev, RT3070, REV_RT3070F)) {

Gertjan van Wingerde

2010-04-26 21:46 UTC #3 lore raw

In reply to Helmut Schaa

Quoted 15 lines · Helmut Schaa

Restore the rfcsr initialization for RT305x SoC devices which was removed by "rt2x00: Finish rt3070 support in rt2800 register initialization.".
This fixes the rx path on SoC devices.
Signed-off-by Helmut Schaa <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c |   34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +0 -0
index 2648f31..1358d9a 100644

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev) · line 1708

Quoted 7 lines

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +2 -1

@@ -1703,7 +1703,8 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 	if (!rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3071) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3090) &&
-	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390))
+	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390) &&
+	    !(rt2x00_is_soc(rt2x00dev) && rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)))
 		return 0;

As indicated in the separate email, we should also check for the presence of an RF3020, RF3021 or RF3022 RF chipset for the RT2872 case (maybe this should be more generic, because I'm sure this will also hold for the other RT chipsets).

Quoted 30 lines

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +24 -0

/*

@@ -1771,6 +1772,37 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x8f);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 30, 0x20);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 31, 0x0f);
+	} else if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)) {
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 0, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 1, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 2, 0xf7);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 3, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 4, 0x40);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 5, 0x03);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 6, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 7, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 8, 0x39);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 9, 0x0f);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 10, 0x60);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 11, 0x21);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 12, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 13, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 14, 0x90);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 15, 0x58);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 16, 0xb3);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 17, 0x92);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 18, 0x2c);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 19, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 20, 0xba);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 21, 0xdb);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 22, 0x00);

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev) · line 1808

Quoted 10 lines

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +7 -0

+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 23, 0x31);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 24, 0x08);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 25, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 26, 0x25);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 27, 0x23);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 28, 0x13);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x83);
 	}
 
 	if (rt2x00_rt_rev_lt(rt2x00dev, RT3070, REV_RT3070F)) {

Here we need 2 additional rfcsr_writes, for RF CSR 30 and RF CSR 31, both set to value 0x00. Also, we can add an "return 0" at the end of the sequence, as nothing more needs to be done for RT2872.

---
Gertjan.

Helmut Schaa

author

2010-04-27 06:28 UTC #4 lore raw

Am Montag 26 April 2010 schrieb Gertjan van Wingerde:

Quoted 11 lines · Helmut Schaa

Quoted 10 lines
Restore the rfcsr initialization for RT305x SoC devices which was removed by "rt2x00: Finish rt3070 support in rt2800 register initialization.".
This fixes the rx path on SoC devices.
Signed-off-by Helmut Schaa <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c |   34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

Quoted 16 lines

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev) · line 1708
Quoted 12 lines
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +2 -1
index 2648f31..1358d9a 100644
@@ -1703,7 +1703,8 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 	if (!rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3071) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3090) &&
-	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390))
+	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390) &&
+	    !(rt2x00_is_soc(rt2x00dev) && rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)))
 		return 0;
As indicated in the separate email, we should also check for the presence of an RF3020, RF3021 or RF3022 RF chipset for the RT2872 case (maybe this should be more generic, because I'm sure this will also hold for the other RT chipsets).

Ok, do you mean we should only check for rfXXX instead of checking for SoC and rt2872? Or should we check for SoC + rfXXX?

Quoted 38 lines

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +31 -0

/*

@@ -1771,6 +1772,37 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x8f);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 30, 0x20);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 31, 0x0f);
+	} else if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)) {
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 0, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 1, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 2, 0xf7);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 3, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 4, 0x40);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 5, 0x03);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 6, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 7, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 8, 0x39);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 9, 0x0f);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 10, 0x60);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 11, 0x21);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 12, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 13, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 14, 0x90);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 15, 0x58);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 16, 0xb3);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 17, 0x92);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 18, 0x2c);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 19, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 20, 0xba);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 21, 0xdb);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 22, 0x00);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 23, 0x31);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 24, 0x08);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 25, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 26, 0x25);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 27, 0x23);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 28, 0x13);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x83);
 	}

Quoted 4 lines

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev) · line 1808
Quoted 1 line
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +0 -0
 	if (rt2x00_rt_rev_lt(rt2x00dev, RT3070, REV_RT3070F)) {
Here we need 2 additional rfcsr_writes, for RF CSR 30 and RF CSR 31, both set to value 0x00. Also, we can add an "return 0" at the end of the sequence, as nothing more needs to be done for RT2872.

Ok, thanks for looking that up.

Helmut

Gertjan van Wingerde

2010-04-27 18:03 UTC #5 lore raw

Quoted 29 lines · Helmut Schaa

Am Montag 26 April 2010 schrieb Gertjan van Wingerde:
Quoted 11 lines · Helmut Schaa
Quoted 10 lines
Restore the rfcsr initialization for RT305x SoC devices which was removed by "rt2x00: Finish rt3070 support in rt2800 register initialization.".
This fixes the rx path on SoC devices.
Signed-off-by Helmut Schaa <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c |   34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Quoted 16 lines
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev) · line 1708
Quoted 12 lines
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +2 -1
index 2648f31..1358d9a 100644
@@ -1703,7 +1703,8 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 	if (!rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3071) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3090) &&
-	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390))
+	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390) &&
+	    !(rt2x00_is_soc(rt2x00dev) && rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)))
 		return 0;
As indicated in the separate email, we should also check for the presence of an RF3020, RF3021 or RF3022 RF chipset for the RT2872 case (maybe this should be more generic, because I'm sure this will also hold for the other RT chipsets).

Quoted 2 lines

Ok, do you mean we should only check for rfXXX instead of checking for SoC and rt2872? Or should we check for SoC + rfXXX?

I think that at the moment we should be looking at checking for SoC, RT2872 and RFxxxx. To be honest I don't completely know what these RF CSR values represent, we can only find them in a SoC Ralink driver, so FWIW it may simply be good settings for an AP (the main use case for a SoC device) but not so good for an STA.

So properly applying this only to SoC devices with the right RT chipset and right RF chipset seems to be the proper thing here.

Quoted 39 lines

drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +31 -0

/*

@@ -1771,6 +1772,37 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x8f);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 30, 0x20);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 31, 0x0f);
+	} else if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)) {
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 0, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 1, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 2, 0xf7);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 3, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 4, 0x40);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 5, 0x03);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 6, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 7, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 8, 0x39);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 9, 0x0f);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 10, 0x60);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 11, 0x21);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 12, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 13, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 14, 0x90);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 15, 0x58);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 16, 0xb3);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 17, 0x92);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 18, 0x2c);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 19, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 20, 0xba);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 21, 0xdb);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 22, 0x00);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 23, 0x31);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 24, 0x08);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 25, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 26, 0x25);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 27, 0x23);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 28, 0x13);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x83);
 	}

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 4 lines
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev) · line 1808
Quoted 1 line
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +0 -0
 	if (rt2x00_rt_rev_lt(rt2x00dev, RT3070, REV_RT3070F)) {
Here we need 2 additional rfcsr_writes, for RF CSR 30 and RF CSR 31, both set to value 0x00. Also, we can add an "return 0" at the end of the sequence, as nothing more needs to be done for RT2872.
Ok, thanks for looking that up.

And please add the rt2x00_is_soc(rt2x00dev) test to that hunk as well. It makes it easier to see that that piece is for SoC RT2872 devices only.

P.S. It seems that John already applied this patch without even Ivo or me Acking it, so I guess an incremental patch would be best now.

---
Gertjan

John W. Linville

2010-04-27 18:30 UTC #6 lore raw

Quoted 2 lines · Gertjan van Wingerde

P.S. It seems that John already applied this patch without even Ivo or me Acking it, so I guess an incremental patch would be best now.

Yes, sorry if that offends -- "fix rx path" makes me take things seriously. :-)

Signature · 2 lines

John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
[email protected]			might be all we have.  Be ready.

Gertjan van Wingerde

2010-04-27 19:41 UTC #7 lore raw

Quoted 7 lines · John W. Linville

Quoted 2 lines · Gertjan van Wingerde
P.S. It seems that John already applied this patch without even Ivo or me Acking it, so I guess an incremental patch would be best now.
Yes, sorry if that offends -- "fix rx path" makes me take things seriously. :-)

Don't worry about it. No offense was taken. It was more a surprise to see it been applied before I even had to chance to review it, but the patch in itself is correct, it just needs a bit polishing.

---
Gertjan.

Helmut Schaa

author

2010-04-27 19:12 UTC #8 lore raw

In reply to Gertjan van Wingerde

Am Dienstag 27 April 2010 schrieb Gertjan van Wingerde:

Quoted 85 lines · Helmut Schaa

Quoted 29 lines
Am Montag 26 April 2010 schrieb Gertjan van Wingerde:
Quoted 11 lines · Helmut Schaa
Quoted 10 lines
Restore the rfcsr initialization for RT305x SoC devices which was removed by "rt2x00: Finish rt3070 support in rt2800 register initialization.".
This fixes the rx path on SoC devices.
Signed-off-by Helmut Schaa <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c |   34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Quoted 16 lines
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev) · line 1708
Quoted 12 lines
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +2 -1
index 2648f31..1358d9a 100644
@@ -1703,7 +1703,8 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 	if (!rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3071) &&
 	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3090) &&
-	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390))
+	    !rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3390) &&
+	    !(rt2x00_is_soc(rt2x00dev) && rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)))
 		return 0;
As indicated in the separate email, we should also check for the presence of an RF3020, RF3021 or RF3022 RF chipset for the RT2872 case (maybe this should be more generic, because I'm sure this will also hold for the other RT chipsets).
Quoted 2 lines
Ok, do you mean we should only check for rfXXX instead of checking for SoC and rt2872? Or should we check for SoC + rfXXX?
I think that at the moment we should be looking at checking for SoC, RT2872 and RFxxxx. To be honest I don't completely know what these RF CSR values represent, we can only find them in a SoC Ralink driver, so FWIW it may simply be good settings for an AP (the main use case for a SoC device) but not so good for an STA.
So properly applying this only to SoC devices with the right RT chipset and right RF chipset seems to be the proper thing here.
Quoted 44 lines
Quoted 43 lines
Quoted 30 lines
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +24 -0
 	/*
@@ -1771,6 +1772,37 @@ int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x8f);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 30, 0x20);
 		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 31, 0x0f);
+	} else if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT2872)) {
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 0, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 1, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 2, 0xf7);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 3, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 4, 0x40);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 5, 0x03);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 6, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 7, 0x50);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 8, 0x39);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 9, 0x0f);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 10, 0x60);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 11, 0x21);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 12, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 13, 0x75);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 14, 0x90);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 15, 0x58);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 16, 0xb3);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 17, 0x92);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 18, 0x2c);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 19, 0x02);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 20, 0xba);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 21, 0xdb);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 22, 0x00);
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c int rt2800_init_rfcsr(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev) · line 1808
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c +7 -0
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 23, 0x31);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 24, 0x08);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 25, 0x01);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 26, 0x25);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 27, 0x23);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 28, 0x13);
+		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 29, 0x83);
 	}
 
 	if (rt2x00_rt_rev_lt(rt2x00dev, RT3070, REV_RT3070F)) {
Here we need 2 additional rfcsr_writes, for RF CSR 30 and RF CSR 31, both set to value 0x00. Also, we can add an "return 0" at the end of the sequence, as nothing more needs to be done for RT2872.

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 1 line
Ok, thanks for looking that up.
And please add the rt2x00_is_soc(rt2x00dev) test to that hunk as well. It makes it easier to see that that piece is for SoC RT2872 devices only.

Agreed, will send a followup tomorrow. And thanks for checking the Ralink SoC driver.

Quoted 2 lines

P.S. It seems that John already applied this patch without even Ivo or me Acking it, so I guess an incremental patch would be best now.

Yeah, but the patch doesn't break anything for PCI and USB devices and since not many people use the SoC code yet it's no drama ;).

John, would you like me to send a followup patch or would you like to revert that one and apply a fixed one?

Thanks,
Helmut

John W. Linville

2010-04-27 19:15 UTC #9 lore raw

Quoted 4 lines · Helmut Schaa

Am Dienstag 27 April 2010 schrieb Gertjan van Wingerde:
John, would you like me to send a followup patch or would you like to revert that one and apply a fixed one?

Follow-up patch, please...thanks!

John

Signature · 2 lines

John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
[email protected]			might be all we have.  Be ready.