Re: [bluetooth] RF (our interface)

[Jamil Khatib <jamilkhatib75@yahoo.com>]

> > OK but should baseband control all RF registers? I
> > think there are some that can be controllered or
> at
> > least read from higher layers such as status
> > registers.
> 
> [Ling] Yeah, there are lots of registers, which
> might be useful for upper
> layer, but usually not. The RF register provide most
> of the information for
> tweaking RF performance. Philsar(Connexant)'s RF has
> 60 registers, Ericsson
> has around 20, as far as I know, most of them is
> unrelevant to upper layer
> unless upper layer want to show something for
> debugging or showing status
> purpose.

So you suggest to let the Baseband control it? But I
am afraid that if pure hardware control on these
registers will be done in hardware will not beable to
support different RF phys? at least we can not
gurantee that two RF chips have the same address for
the same registers. So we can just define signals for
the common registers and bits between all RF devices,
make the RF bridge map them to the correct address and
the reset will be controlled by software.

> >
> [Ling] Right, low power clock(32kHz) also provided
> for standby purpose. We
> need take it into account.
OK lets go for three clocks 1MHz (Tx/RX clock), 32KHz
(low power clock) and 13->20 MHz system clock.
need to elaborate more on how to operate these clocks
and their functionalities

pls check the bluetooth site at opencores I am going
to update it for each issue we agree upone


> 
> Regards,
> -Ling
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from bluetooth mailing list please
> visit http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
--
To unsubscribe from bluetooth mailing list please visit http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml