On Tuesday 12 September 2006 01:59, John W. Linville wrote:
> + value16 = bcm43xx_shm_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_SHM_SHARED,
> + BCM43xx_UCODE_REVISION);
> +
> + dprintk(KERN_INFO PFX "Microcode rev 0x%x, pl 0x%x "
> + "(20%.2i-%.2i-%.2i %.2i:%.2i:%.2i)\n", value16,
> + bcm43xx_shm_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_SHM_SHARED,
> + BCM43xx_UCODE_PATCHLEVEL),
> + (bcm43xx_shm_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_SHM_SHARED,
> + BCM43xx_UCODE_DATE) >> 12) & 0xf,
> + (bcm43xx_shm_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_SHM_SHARED,
> + BCM43xx_UCODE_DATE) >> 8) & 0xf,
> + bcm43xx_shm_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_SHM_SHARED,
> + BCM43xx_UCODE_DATE) & 0xff,
> + (bcm43xx_shm_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_SHM_SHARED,
> + BCM43xx_UCODE_TIME) >> 11) & 0x1f,
> + (bcm43xx_shm_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_SHM_SHARED,
> + BCM43xx_UCODE_TIME) >> 5) & 0x3f,
> + bcm43xx_shm_read16(bcm, BCM43xx_SHM_SHARED,
> + BCM43xx_UCODE_TIME) & 0x1f);
> +
> + if ( value16 > 0x128 ) {
> + dprintk(KERN_ERR PFX
> + "Firmware: no support for microcode rev > 0x128\n");
> + err = -1;
> + goto err_release_fw;
> + }
Hm, this mustn't be a dprintk, as it's compiled away if
debugging is disabled. So it silently fails.
The text could be clarified, too.
returning -1 as error code is also very bad, as it's
propagated to userspace. I suggest EOPNOTSUPP, but maybe there's
something better.
Larry, can you do a patch which changes it to something like the following?
if ( value16 > 0x128 ) {
printk(KERN_ERR PFX
"Firmware: no support for microcode extracted "
"from version 4.x binary drivers.\n");
err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
goto err_release_fw;
}
--
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
