W dniu 9 kwietnia 2011 13:31 użytkownik Michael Büsch <[email protected]> napisał: > On Sat, 2011-04-09 at 10:10 +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> 2011/4/9 Jonas Gorski <[email protected]>: >> > while matching SPROM content to its offsets, I noticed that >> > SSB_SPROM4_ANTAVAIL has an odd offset (0x5d)[1]. Shouldn't this be >> > rather even (probably 0x5c), since the SPROM consists of 16 bit words? >> > >> > Regards >> > Jonas >> > >> > [1] >> > <http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-next-2.6.git;a=blob;f=include/linux/ssb/ssb_regs.h;h=402955ae48ceac9c118833bed28ca093407e4638;hb=HEAD#l290> >> > >> > P.S: I currently lack the free space for yet another kernel git tree, >> > so I would prefer if somebody else fixes this - assuming my analysis >> > is right ;-) >> >> I'll have time after weekend. There is some mess generally. We have >> ETHPHY instead of some LEDS and we have MASKs inverted for ANTENNA. > > Note that the specs might also be incorrect on some of the fields. > There were bugfixes in the struct that were probably not propagated > up to the specs.
Another one: http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/SPROM Revision 4 SPROM 0x005C bits 7-0: 802.11B/G Antennas Available bits 15-8: 802.11A Antenas Available [my comments] 7-0 means 0xFF 15-8 means 0xFF00 bcmsrom_fmt.h: #define SROM4_AA2G_MASK 0x00ff #define SROM4_AA5G_MASK 0xff00 However ssb seems to implement that masks switched: #define SSB_SPROM4_ANTAVAIL_A 0x00FF /* A-PHY bitfield */ #define SSB_SPROM4_ANTAVAIL_BG 0xFF00 /* B-PHY and G-PHY bitfield */ (agaik A==5GHz; G==2GHz) It seems that for both cases specs are fine. -- Rafał _______________________________________________ b43-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/b43-dev
