246tnt at gmail.com
Tue Nov 20 09:20:23 UTC 2012
> We should probably have a better solution than to manually patch the
> source. I could imagine:
> 1) build a DCS and a PCS version of the firmware images
That would require de-duplicating all the code for each target ...
it's already a pain as it is.
Or we just give up the idea of building all the fw image all the time
and have like a menuconfig system, but that's a massive build system
> 2) have the user set a #define that is evaluated in the RFFE
Changing define or changing a DCS into PCS in a file doesn't change
much. People won't read the doc anyway.
> 3) simply include DCS and PCS support in the firmware builds and rely
> on a configuration file / 'mobile' to define what bands to use
mobile has a config file ... But it specifies which band to use, not
the RF port on the RITA to use.
There are (I have one) PCS phone that have the DCS input of the RITA
connected and not the PCS one.
(They're pretty much symmetrical, not internal differences)
So that RFFE config specifies which internal RF port is connected, not
the band to use. Then the internal sw logic will try to find how to
configure the switch (like if mobile asks for a PCS ARFCN but the RFFE
config says only the DCS RF port is connected, it will try using that
port and not the PCS port of the RITA where there is nothing
More information about the baseband-devel