[PATCH] bcm43xx: Fix incorrect definition of PHY revision

[PATCH] bcm43xx: Fix incorrect definition of PHY revision

[Larry Finger]

There is a typographical error in the spefications that interchange the PHY version
and revision. Fixing this error makes all BCM43xx varieties work at full CCCK rates.

Signed-off-by: Larry Finger<Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>
---

John,

This patch should be put into wireless-2.6 and into 'upstream' as soon as possible.
I will be sending it to stable for inclusion in 2.6.20.1, and whatever other kernels
are still being maintained by -stable.

Larry
---
 
Index: wireless-2.6/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
===================================================================
--- wireless-2.6.orig/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
+++ wireless-2.6/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
@@ -3704,9 +3704,9 @@ static int bcm43xx_read_phyinfo(struct b
 
 	value = bcm43xx_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_MMIO_PHY_VER);
 
-	phy_version = (value & 0xF000) >> 12;
+	phy_rev = (value & 0xF000) >> 12;
 	phy_type = (value & 0x0F00) >> 8;
-	phy_rev = (value & 0x000F);
+	phy_version = (value & 0x000F);
 
 	dprintk(KERN_INFO PFX "Detected PHY: Version: %x, Type %x, Revision %x\n",
 		phy_version, phy_type, phy_rev);

===

[PATCH] bcm43xx: Fix incorrect definition of PHY revision

[Larry Finger]

There is a typographical error in the spefications that interchange the PHY version
and revision. Fixing this error makes all BCM43xx varieties work at full CCCK rates.

Signed-off-by: Larry Finger<Larry.Finger-tQ5ms3gMjBLk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>
---

John,

This patch should be put into wireless-2.6 and into 'upstream' as soon as possible.
I will be sending it to stable for inclusion in 2.6.20.1, and whatever other kernels
are still being maintained by -stable.

Larry
---
 
Index: wireless-2.6/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
===================================================================
--- wireless-2.6.orig/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
+++ wireless-2.6/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
@@ -3704,9 +3704,9 @@ static int bcm43xx_read_phyinfo(struct b
 
 	value = bcm43xx_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_MMIO_PHY_VER);
 
-	phy_version = (value & 0xF000) >> 12;
+	phy_rev = (value & 0xF000) >> 12;
 	phy_type = (value & 0x0F00) >> 8;
-	phy_rev = (value & 0x000F);
+	phy_version = (value & 0x000F);
 
 	dprintk(KERN_INFO PFX "Detected PHY: Version: %x, Type %x, Revision %x\n",
 		phy_version, phy_type, phy_rev);

===

Re: [PATCH] bcm43xx: Fix incorrect definition of PHY revision

[Michael Buesch]

On Wednesday 07 February 2007 04:31, Larry Finger wrote:
> There is a typographical error in the spefications that interchange the PHY version
> and revision. Fixing this error makes all BCM43xx varieties work at full CCCK rates.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Larry Finger<Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>
> ---
> 
> John,
> 
> This patch should be put into wireless-2.6 and into 'upstream' as soon as possible.
> I will be sending it to stable for inclusion in 2.6.20.1, and whatever other kernels
> are still being maintained by -stable.
> 
> Larry
> ---
>  
> Index: wireless-2.6/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
> ===================================================================
> --- wireless-2.6.orig/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
> +++ wireless-2.6/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
> @@ -3704,9 +3704,9 @@ static int bcm43xx_read_phyinfo(struct b
>  
>  	value = bcm43xx_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_MMIO_PHY_VER);
>  
> -	phy_version = (value & 0xF000) >> 12;
> +	phy_rev = (value & 0xF000) >> 12;
>  	phy_type = (value & 0x0F00) >> 8;
> -	phy_rev = (value & 0x000F);
> +	phy_version = (value & 0x000F);
>  
>  	dprintk(KERN_INFO PFX "Detected PHY: Version: %x, Type %x, Revision %x\n",
>  		phy_version, phy_type, phy_rev);


I don't think this is correct.
>From which part of the specs did you get this?
http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/802.11/PHY is where the PHY_Version
register is explained. "phy_version"=="AnalogType"

Actually it is possible that phy_revision is mask 0xFF, but that's
not too important at the moment, as we don't have revisions>0xF, yet.

But besides that, it's interresting that this "fixes" things for you.

Especially since wireless-2.6 has no support for hw-power-control, which
is needed by cards 4318 and newer.

-- 
Greetings Michael.