This reverts commit aec8e88c94.
This solution turned out to cause interrupt delivery problems, and
rather than trying to fix this approach, it has been scrapped in favor
of an alternative (and far simpler) implementation.
Signed-off-by: Solomon Peachy <pizza@shaftnet.org>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
When we get an interrupt from the hardware, the first thing the driver does
is tell the device to mask off the interrupt line. Unfortunately this
involves a SPI transaction in interrupt context. Some (most?) SPI
controllers perform the transfer asynchronously and try to sleep.
This is bad, and triggers a BUG().
So, work around this by using adding a hwbus hook for the cw1200 driver
core to call. The cw1200_spi driver translates this into
irq_disable()/irq_enable() calls instead, which can safely be called in
interrupt context.
Apparently the platforms I used to develop the cw1200_spi driver used
synchronous spi_sync() implementations, which is why this didn't surface
until now.
Many thanks to Dave Sizeburns for the inital bug report and his services
as a tester.
Signed-off-by: Solomon Peachy <pizza@shaftnet.org>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Most of these relate to endianness problems, and are purely cosmetic.
But a couple of them were legit -- listen interval parsing and some of
the rate selection code would malfunction on BE systems.
There's still one cosmetic warning remaining, in the (admittedly) ugly
code in cw1200_spi.c. It's there because the hardware needs 16-bit SPI
transfers, but many SPI controllers only operate 8 bits at a time.
If there's a cleaner way of handling this, I'm all ears.
Signed-off-by: Solomon Peachy <pizza@shaftnet.org>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
goto after return is wrong.
The other code in this block needs to set an
error value then goto an error release block.
This one doesn't need to release anything and
was likely a copy/paste remainder.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Acked-By: Solomon Peachy <pizza@shaftnet.org>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
This avoids problems when building on SPARC targets due to the driver
calling the bus abstraction layer 'sbus'. Not that any SBUS-sporting
SPARC targets are likely to have an SDIO controller, but this is the
correct thing to do.
See http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/8846508/
Signed-off-by: Solomon Peachy <pizza@shaftnet.org>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Solomon Peachy