[rt2x00-users] RT5390 not working with rt2800pci
anisse at astier.eu
Mon Apr 16 17:06:09 EST 2012
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:22:36 +1000, Julian Calaby <julian.calaby at gmail.com> wrote :
> Hi Anisse,
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 15:57, Anisse Astier <anisse at astier.eu> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Julian Calaby <julian.calaby at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Anisse,
> >> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 03:33, Anisse Astier <anisse at astier.eu> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Anisse Astier <anisse at astier.eu> wrote:
> >>> Why some cards work and others don't is a mystery.
> >> Not really, old cards generally work, current cards that have been out
> >> for a little while generally work, and bleeding edge,
> >> just-released-yesterday cards tend not to.
> > What I meant is that in the set of RT5390RL cards, some work, some
> > don't, consistently, and I cannot find any difference between them.
> Sorry, I misinterpreted what you meant.
> So, to clarify, am I right in saying that you have:
> - "RT5390R" cards, PCI revision 0502 which all work
It's marked "RT5390L" (not R) and has revision 0502. And in the code it's
referred as REV_RT5390F (yes it's different).
> - "RT5390RL" cards, PCI revision 1502 which work
> - "RT5390RL" cards, PCI revision 1502 which don't work with the
> symptoms described above.
Correct, except revisions are *not* visible in PCI revision. These are only
visible in driver output when debug is enabled, with this printf:
"Chipset detected - rt: %04x, rf: %04x, rev: %04x.\n",
rt2x00dev->chip.rt, rt2x00dev->chip.rf, rt2x00dev->chip.rev);
Which gets it by reading register MAC_CSR0_REVISION .
> Ok, so let's look at this a bit closer: the "iw info" diff you
> provided before makes me think that there is some form of regulatory
> setting difference between the working and non-working cards. I would
> guess that this would be visible in the dmesg output, could you boot
> with a working card, save the dmesg, then boot with a non-working
> card, save the dmesg, diff them and reply with that diff? I'm guessing
> that there would be some lines in there about CRDA or regulatory which
> would be different.
I don't think this is related, but I'll try to provide the two dmesg,
with today's wireless-next.
This might be polluted by the fact that the "working" card succeded in
connecting(on channel 6), which then changed the regulatory domain. I'll
try to get unpolluted results.
> Also, what channel is your AP on and what region of the world are you
> in? (I'm guessing Europe from your email address, but which country
I'm in France, but using another wireless card, I can scan APs on
More information about the users