Hi,

quoted text
> > If rt2x00 is loaded and detected the device, it should print out a debug message that starts with:
> > "Chipset detected - " What is in your case the complete line?
> 
> Ok, I guess I should include more complete debug output.
> 
> phy0 -> rt2x00usb_vendor_request: Error - Vendor Request 0x09 failed for offset 0x0000 with error -32

- Vendor requests error with the -32 errors often indicate the incorrect device.

quoted text
> phy0 -> rt73usb_validate_eeprom: EEPROM recover - MAC: 66:76:2b:e8:68:e7

- Incorrect MAC address read from the device. Another hint that the device is not rt73.

quoted text
> phy0 -> rt2x00usb_vendor_request: Error - Vendor Request 0x07 failed for offset 0x3000 with error -32
> phy0 -> rt2x00_set_chip: Info - Chipset detected - rt: 1300, rf: 0000, rev: c03c0ae0

- A incorrect RF chipset. (valid values are: 1, 2, 3 or 4). Another indication of a incorrect device.
- A completely bogus chipset revision. A valid rt73 device has the revision "2573X" Where only the
  X is a variable.

quoted text
> phy0 -> rt73usb_init_eeprom: Error - Invalid RF chipset detected
> 
> ...so, I think hardware is indeed quite similar to what rt73usb driver
> expects...?

No. You can assume you are forcing rt73 to control a non-rt73 device.
The fact that you had to hack to bypass the RT and RF chipset validation also confirms that,
those checks were there for a reason. Namely to make sure the corect driver was being used for the device.

Ivo
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/