RX filter flags previously set for DFS radar detection were not
preserved after "ath9k: disable unnecessary PHY error reporting".
This patch ensures that the flags required for DFS support are
kept set.
Signed-off-by: Zefir Kurtisi
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c | 12
On 2011-11-02 1:10 PM, Zefir Kurtisi wrote:
> RX filter flags previously set for DFS radar detection were not
> preserved after "ath9k: disable unnecessary PHY error reporting".
>
> This patch ensures that the flags required for DFS support are
> kept set.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zefir Kurtisi
I think p
On 11/02/2011 02:19 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
> On 2011-11-02 1:10 PM, Zefir Kurtisi wrote:
>> RX filter flags previously set for DFS radar detection were not
>> preserved after "ath9k: disable unnecessary PHY error reporting".
>>
>> This patch ensures that the flags required for DFS support are
>>
Hi everybody!
The ALL0258N (AR7420 + AR9285) uses an external antenna switch which is
controlled by setting values into the AR_PHY_SWITCH_COM register.
Thinking about how to implement this in ath9k on OpenWrt, my solution would be
to pass an array of allowed values via platform-data and then expose
On 2 November 2011 10:14, Daniel Golle wrote:
> Hi everybody!
> The ALL0258N (AR7420 + AR9285) uses an external antenna switch which is
> controlled by setting values into the AR_PHY_SWITCH_COM register.
> Thinking about how to implement this in ath9k on OpenWrt, my solution would be
> to pass an
Hi Adrian,
On 11/02/2011 06:22 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> There's an antenna switch field in the EEPROM, so I take it that you
> require multiple "valid" values? What/why would you choose between
> them?
according to the OEM it's allowed to set 0x09a00210 for horizontal or 0x0a900120
for vertical.
On 2011-11-02 6:49 PM, Daniel Golle wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>
> On 11/02/2011 06:22 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> There's an antenna switch field in the EEPROM, so I take it that you
>> require multiple "valid" values? What/why would you choose between
>> them?
> according to the OEM it's allowed to se
On 2 November 2011 10:52, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> I don't know the exact electronic details of the implementation, so I'd go
>> with
>> a list of known-to-be-good values (passed to the driver via platform-data)
>> instead of a causal check (e.g. don't allow to set the TX and RX to the same
>> an
On 11/02/2011 06:52 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> I don't know the exact electronic details of the implementation, so I'd go
>> with
>> a list of known-to-be-good values (passed to the driver via platform-data)
>> instead of a causal check (e.g. don't allow to set the TX and RX to the same
>> antenn
On 2011-11-02 7:16 PM, Daniel Golle wrote:
> On 11/02/2011 06:52 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>>> I don't know the exact electronic details of the implementation, so I'd go
>>> with
>>> a list of known-to-be-good values (passed to the driver via platform-data)
>>> instead of a causal check (e.g. do
Hi Felix!
Thank you very much for that info!
On 11/02/2011 08:50 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
> To figure out the remaining settings for this hardware, please give me
> the values of registers 0x99ac (AR_PHY_MULTICHAIN_GAIN_CTL) and 0xA208
> (AR_PHY_CCK_DETECT) on your device.
from debugfs regdump:
11 matches
Mail list logo
