On Friday 09 February 2007 20:55, Joseph Jezak wrote: > Michael Buesch wrote: > > On Friday 09 February 2007 20:05, Joseph Jezak wrote: > >>> I'll agree to that as long as there is a clear indication of any > >>> differences between V3 and V4 firmware. > >> That's also part of the problem. With the v4 driver, Broadcom > >> dropped support for a number of older BPHY devices (4301/4303 and > >> some 4306 revisions). Do we still want to support those? Should I > >> continue writing the specs for the uCode revision it's based on or > >> should I combine them? > > > > If it's easily possible, please try to combine the old stuff > > with the new v4 specs. > > I think it's basically only dropped if() branches, right? > > > > Well, here's the problem. There are a few places where a value is > changed (different value written to a register). Does this mean > that the value is different due to the uCode changes (can't tell, no > documentation)? Is it applicable to all revisions (can't tell, some > revisions are not supported in this version)? If the revision > number range in a check changes is that because of a difference in > supported cards or a bug fix? > > So, it's not as simple as just dropped if() branches. I can do my > best to combine them (I have done some of this already), but I can't > promise that it'll be accurate for all revisions or versions of the > chipset.
Ok, I see. How many of these old devices exist and who has access to them? If we want to combine stuff, we really must test it on these devices then. -- Greetings Michael. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
