[rt2x00-users] [PATCH 7/9] rt2x00: Add rt3071 support in rt2800 register initialization.

[Ivo van Doorn]

On Thursday 08 April 2010, Gertjan van Wingerde wrote:
> Add RT3071 specific register initializations to rt2x00, based on the latest
> Ralink rt3070 vendor driver.
> 
> With this patch my RT3071 based devices start showing a sign of life.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gertjan van Wingerde <gwingerde at gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c |  105 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c
> index 52e2422..209fd85 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c
> @@ -1036,7 +1036,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rt2800_link_stats);
>  static u8 rt2800_get_default_vgc(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
>  {
>  	if (rt2x00dev->curr_band == IEEE80211_BAND_2GHZ) {
> -		if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070))
> +		if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070) ||
> +		    rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3071))
>  			return 0x1c + (2 * rt2x00dev->lna_gain);
>  		else
>  			return 0x2e + rt2x00dev->lna_gain;
> @@ -1085,6 +1086,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rt2800_link_tuner);
>  int rt2800_init_registers(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
>  {
>  	u32 reg, reg2;
> +	u16 eeprom;
>  	unsigned int i;
>  
>  	rt2800_register_read(rt2x00dev, WPDMA_GLO_CFG, &reg);
> @@ -1202,7 +1204,20 @@ int rt2800_init_registers(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
>  	rt2x00_set_field32(&reg, BKOFF_SLOT_CFG_CC_DELAY_TIME, 2);
>  	rt2800_register_write(rt2x00dev, BKOFF_SLOT_CFG, reg);
>  
> -	if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070)) {
> +	if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3071)) {
> +		rt2800_register_write(rt2x00dev, TX_SW_CFG0, 0x00000400);
> +		rt2800_register_write(rt2x00dev, TX_SW_CFG1, 0x00000000);
> +		if (rt2x00_rev(rt2x00dev) < 0x0211) {
> +			rt2x00_eeprom_read(rt2x00dev, EEPROM_NIC, &eeprom);
> +			if (rt2x00_get_field16(eeprom, EEPROM_NIC_DAC_TEST))
> +				reg = 0x0000002c;
> +			else
> +				reg = 0x0000000f;
> +		} else {
> +			reg = 0x00000000;
> +		}

Is these some meaning to this fields, which makes it easier to use set_field32
with some definition to indicate how the field is named to understand what
the value means?

> -	if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3070)) {
> +	if (rt2x00_rt(rt2x00dev, RT3071)) {
> +		rt2800_rfcsr_read(rt2x00dev, 1, &rfcsr);
> +		rfcsr &= ~0x0c;
> +		rfcsr |= 0x31;
> +		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 1, rfcsr);
> +
> +		rt2800_rfcsr_read(rt2x00dev, 15, &rfcsr);
> +		rfcsr &= ~0x08;
> +		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 15, rfcsr);
> +
> +		rt2800_rfcsr_read(rt2x00dev, 20, &rfcsr);
> +		rfcsr &= ~0x08;
> +		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 20, rfcsr);
> +
> +		rt2800_rfcsr_read(rt2x00dev, 21, &rfcsr);
> +		rfcsr &= ~0x08;
> +		rt2800_rfcsr_write(rt2x00dev, 21, rfcsr);
> +	}

Perhaps this needs some rt2x00_set_field8() magic as well. Not sure though

Ivo