Al 02/07/11 20:34, En/na John Crispin ha escrit:
> On 02/07/11 20:15, Luca Olivetti wrote:
>> Al 02/07/11 19:58, En/na Florian Fainelli ha escrit:
>>
>>
>>>> 0) @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
>>>> +--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom_def.c 2011-02-08
>>>> 17:33:42.000000000 +0100 ++++
>>>> b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom_def.c 2011-02-20
>>>> 17:51:47.000000000 +0100 +@@ -147,7 +152,7 @@
>>>> + return false;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> +- if (!ath9k_hw_use_flash(ah)) {
>>>> ++ if (1) {
>>>>
>>> This looks wrong.
>>>
>> Why?
>>
>> See http://patchwork.openwrt.org/patch/849/ for the previous discussion.
>>
>> Bye
>>
> because it will break devices which dont have the eeprom inside the flash
Are you sure?
Mind me, I could be wrong, but looking at eeprom.c:
int ath9k_hw_eeprom_init(struct ath_hw *ah)
{
int status;
if (AR_SREV_9300_20_OR_LATER(ah))
ah->eep_ops = &eep_ar9300_ops;
else if (AR_SREV_9287(ah)) {
ah->eep_ops = &eep_ar9287_ops;
} else if (AR_SREV_9285(ah) || AR_SREV_9271(ah)) {
ah->eep_ops = &eep_4k_ops;
} else {
ah->eep_ops = &eep_def_ops;
}
if (!ah->eep_ops->fill_eeprom(ah))
return -EIO;
status = ah->eep_ops->check_eeprom(ah);
return status;
}
So when it reaches check_eeprom (where the endianness check is done),
it has already called fill_eeprom, which copies the data in ram,
so it shouldn't matter if the device has an onboard eeprom or uses the flash to
emulate it.
Felix said that the endianness check should be done unconditionally, maybe
he knows better.
Bye
--
Luca
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
