From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mathieu Slabbinck <matty.slabbinck@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 20:49:23 +0200
Subject: [ath9k-devel] TX99 unreliable start sequence
In-Reply-To: <CAGoNHniRxYH33zSXxmEExAkqyHV8hj4qtXoBCkSb3N-fOSw_yQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOFH_kF1Oz9cP-Bt=NOcKDbiwsefA+RGQGtHGJZaauvW0cyQhw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGoNHnjK+ixni4FuZm0_=kHgtW1ZP2F1-e8X1cxqiJ-Op3Pj_A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGoNHniRxYH33zSXxmEExAkqyHV8hj4qtXoBCkSb3N-fOSw_yQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOFH_kFJfEiD_qyN=dY7bJ64VuRZ6M=VgMnrjypNvsaWpbVraQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: <ath9k-devel.lists.ath9k.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org

Thanks for the feedback Eduardo,

but this is indeed what I do.
Each test sequence consists of setting all values needed (including the
power), and afterwards, trying to echo 1 > tx99.
This still shows the issue.

Kr

Mathieu

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Eduardo Abinader <eduardoabinader@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Actually, echo $power > tx99_power
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Eduardo Abinader
> <eduardoabinader@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 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.slabbinck@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 at lists.ath9k.org
> >> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
> >>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20160908/268936a5/attachment.htm