is there some specific reason to read TX_PIN_CFG register on RT6352, rather than just null it before programming in tx values like in other chips?
On 12/10/2018, Stanislaw Gruszka <[email protected]> wrote: > The TX_PIN_CFG_RFRX_EN bit was not set on other devices than MT7620, > restore old behavaviour since setting this bit maight not be > correct for older devices. > > Fixes: 41977e86c984 ("rt2x00: add support for MT7620") > Signed-off-by: Stanislaw Gruszka <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c > b/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c > index bf0d12c5b2db..d0af0d9d2550 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c > @@ -3856,10 +3856,12 @@ static void rt2800_config_channel(struct rt2x00_dev > *rt2x00dev, > if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3572)) > rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 8, 0); > > - if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT6352)) > + if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT6352)) { > tx_pin = rt2800_register_read(rt2x00dev, TX_PIN_CFG); > - else > + rt2x00_set_field32(&tx_pin, TX_PIN_CFG_RFRX_EN, 1); > + } else { > tx_pin = 0; > + } > > switch (rt2x00dev->default_ant.tx_chain_num) { > case 3: > @@ -3914,7 +3916,6 @@ static void rt2800_config_channel(struct rt2x00_dev > *rt2x00dev, > > rt2x00_set_field32(&tx_pin, TX_PIN_CFG_RFTR_EN, 1); > rt2x00_set_field32(&tx_pin, TX_PIN_CFG_TRSW_EN, 1); > - rt2x00_set_field32(&tx_pin, TX_PIN_CFG_RFRX_EN, 1); /* mt7620 */ > > rt2800_register_write(rt2x00dev, TX_PIN_CFG, tx_pin); > > -- > 2.7.5 > >
