- Original Message
> From: Rui Paulo
> To: PseudoCylon
> Cc: Bernhard Schmidt ; freebsd-current@freebsd.org;
>Adrian Chadd
> Sent: Wed, September 22, 2010 4:48:14 PM
> Subject: Re: RFT: if_ath HAL refactoring
>
> On 22 Sep 2010, at
On 22 Sep 2010, at 23:42, PseudoCylon wrote:
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Bernhard Schmidt
>> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
>> Cc: PseudoCylon ; Adrian Chadd
>> Sent: Wed, September 22, 2010 12:09:36 AM
>> Subject: Re: RF
- Original Message
> From: Bernhard Schmidt
> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
> Cc: PseudoCylon ; Adrian Chadd
> Sent: Wed, September 22, 2010 12:09:36 AM
> Subject: Re: RFT: if_ath HAL refactoring
>
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2010 06:04:49 PseudoCylon wrote
On Wednesday, September 22, 2010 06:04:49 PseudoCylon wrote:
> - Original Message
>
> > From: Adrian Chadd
> > To: PseudoCylon
> > Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
> > Sent: Tue, September 21, 2010 7:04:37 AM
> > Subject: Re: RFT: if_ath HAL refactor
- Original Message
> From: Adrian Chadd
> To: PseudoCylon
> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
> Sent: Tue, September 21, 2010 7:04:37 AM
> Subject: Re: RFT: if_ath HAL refactoring
>
> On 21 September 2010 11:58, PseudoCylon wrote:
>
> > Just in case
On 21 September 2010 21:19, John Baldwin wrote:
>> I've not idea right now whether there's an Atheros SoC with an
>> AHB-attached wireless device and a PCI bus. In fact, that won't work
>> at the present time because the device names would clash.
>
> Why would the device names clash? We have _lo
On Monday, September 20, 2010 10:06:53 am Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 20 September 2010 21:25, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> > Why not include this iff both 'device ath' and 'device pci' are included?
> > That is what is normally done for bus-specific attachments.
>
> I've not idea right now whether ther
On 21 September 2010 11:58, PseudoCylon wrote:
> Just in case anyone wonders, I've added 11n support to run(4) (USB NIC).
> http://gitorious.org/run/run/trees/11n_beta2
>
> It still has some issues,
> * doesn't work well with atheros chips
> * HT + AP + bridge = Tx may stall (seems OK with nat)
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 01:04:47 +0800
> From: Adrian Chadd
> Subject: Re: RFT: if_ath HAL refactoring
> To: Brandon Weisz
> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
> Message-ID:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 19 September
On 20 September 2010 21:25, John Baldwin wrote:
> Why not include this iff both 'device ath' and 'device pci' are included?
> That is what is normally done for bus-specific attachments.
I've not idea right now whether there's an Atheros SoC with an
AHB-attached wireless device and a PCI bus. In
On Saturday, September 18, 2010 12:09:21 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've uploaded a snapshot of the if_ath HAL which i've been working on.
> I've been refactoring out various bits of the AR5416 HAL into
> something that resembles the ath9k hardware MAC/PHY operations to make
> it easier
oops, I put it in the wrong place. Try again!
adrian
On 19 September 2010 18:03, Rui Paulo wrote:
> On 19 Sep 2010, at 02:34, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
>> On 19 September 2010 06:38, Rui Paulo wrote:
>>
>>> Can you also provide a diff against HEAD please?
>>
>> Done. It's in the same place; named
On 19 Sep 2010, at 02:34, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 19 September 2010 06:38, Rui Paulo wrote:
>
>> Can you also provide a diff against HEAD please?
>
> Done. It's in the same place; named "complete.diff".
Hmm, I don't see it :-(
Regards,
--
Rui Paulo
_
On 19 September 2010 06:38, Rui Paulo wrote:
> Can you also provide a diff against HEAD please?
Done. It's in the same place; named "complete.diff".
Adrian
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebs
On 18 Sep 2010, at 17:09, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've uploaded a snapshot of the if_ath HAL which i've been working on.
> I've been refactoring out various bits of the AR5416 HAL into
> something that resembles the ath9k hardware MAC/PHY operations to make
> it easier to port further a
On 19 September 2010 01:01, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Are there plans for AR9287 support? Unfortunately that is the only ath card
>> I have to test with at the moment.
>
> At some point, yes.
>
> There's a lot of code missing in our driver for ar92xx series chips.
> I'd rather get the existing stuff
On 19 September 2010 00:54, Brandon Weisz wrote:
>> I'd appreciate testing by AR5416/AR9160/AR9280/AR9285 users. I only
>> currently have easy access to AR5416/AR9160. Please let me know
>> immediately if something doesn't work with this which does work in
>> -head.
>
> Are there plans for AR9287
On 09/18/2010 11:09 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Hi all,
I've uploaded a snapshot of the if_ath HAL which i've been working on.
I've been refactoring out various bits of the AR5416 HAL into
something that resembles the ath9k hardware MAC/PHY operations to make
it easier to port further ath9k updates
Hi all,
I've uploaded a snapshot of the if_ath HAL which i've been working on.
I've been refactoring out various bits of the AR5416 HAL into
something that resembles the ath9k hardware MAC/PHY operations to make
it easier to port further ath9k updates over. It also includes the
AR9100 support (but
19 matches
Mail list logo
