The reason behind that, I think, is due to the fact that you have to
echo 1 > tx99_power, before setting tx99.
Eduardo
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 10:07 PM, Mathieu Slabbinck
<matty.slabbi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was looking into the TX99 module recently and found that it was not always
> starting properly.
> If for example echo 1 > tx99 is done, the wireless module would not start
> transmitting in all attempts. Even though a cat of tx99 is responding with
> 1.
> Do the same command again (without modifying anything else) and the odds
> increase of the module starting to transmit...
>
> Since this was something annoying, I was investigating the write_file_tx99
> function which seems to be the cause of the improper handling.
> I've created the patch below and it responds much more reliable. Each
> request is properly sending out RF waves.
>
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/tx99.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/tx99.c
> @@ -191,23 +191,14 @@ static ssize_t write_file_tx99(struct file *file,
> const char __user *user_buf,
> if (strtobool(buf, &start))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - if (start == sc->tx99_state) {
> - if (!start)
> - return count;
> - ath_dbg(common, XMIT, "Resetting TX99\n");
> - ath9k_tx99_deinit(sc);
> - }
> -
> - if (!start) {
> - ath9k_tx99_deinit(sc);
> - return count;
> - }
> -
> - r = ath9k_tx99_init(sc);
> - if (r)
> - return r;
> -
> - return count;
> + if (start) {
> + ath9k_tx99_deinit(sc);
> + r = ath9k_tx99_init(sc);
> + }
> + else {
> + ath9k_tx99_deinit(sc);
> + }
> + return count;
> }
>
> I'm now just wondering if anyone knows why this piece of code was made this
> way the first place, as I'm sure it had a purpose...
>
> Kr
>
> Mathieu
>
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>
_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
