Date: Thu, 8 May 2014 21:09:08 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Kaho Toshikazu <kaho@elam.kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp> Cc: "freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org" <freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Centrino Wireless-N 1000 support is also broken (Re: iwn(4) in -HEAD supporting Centrino Wireless-N 135) Message-ID: <CAJ-VmonhoD_=drOLsQ4WLdcQK8S6w76jXP9-1ZEE%2B=pDGwPJjw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20396.1399607298@elam.kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp> References: <CAJ-Vmo=y77Eh9CCevN4cAWn23SZ1cG=gCq9YMPeJ4xeP6j77Gw@mail.gmail.com> <20140226123709.GA31099@syn.pertho.net> <CAJ-Vmom=b5tPTh1qWNG=zV5qM=Wzf1BRe5%2B2-ndrR648NSFmkw@mail.gmail.com> <530EE7F4.3080903@shurik.kiev.ua> <CAJ-VmomsEdS5nm8rX6245rAEhVxWeOc4aO9AYrmEBHuUKHG=Tw@mail.gmail.com> <24791.1393550277@elam.kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <CAJ-Vmo=wZyMM1uWTyFV=Yb3vd=EmfiW_NY5Vp1c-JmV5hF2ENA@mail.gmail.com> <75498.1398751548@elam.kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <CAJ-VmokVPA0rQSwins3NuppV%2B2ypYLCTF0nFGeU828GLpPp2KQ@mail.gmail.com> <84650.1398819225@elam.kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <CAJ-Vmo=0t%2BzoJ0HwArHkQnpBbHas5WiKj%2Be9y_T3SFsFsuiewA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmomHvEqJQ-2C9hr4TRD%2BG-a-LgYSG2Z_ESDM-_ndRE4LFA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-Vmo=tv3-LkU5WJENFedK5EqtRDxUsbQAK=rin_zDZiOZfSQ@mail.gmail.com> <14909.1399545008@elam.kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <CAJ-VmoktP6GnMY4YYx=x3DmSrSK7tUGmy%2Bd=VObRCdFAHxFmTw@mail.gmail.com> <20396.1399607298@elam.kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ok, lemme commit the config fix. Thanks for persisting with this! -a On 8 May 2014 20:48, Kaho Toshikazu <kaho@elam.kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp> wrote: > Hello, > > Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> So what's the value of txchainmask and rxchainmask from the EEPROM? >> before things get overridden? >> >> I'd like to figure out what that changed. > > In both before and after applying the patch, sc->txchainmask=1, > sc->rxchainmask=3, ntxsteams=1. I think that 1st breakage > introduced by r258030 in the function iwn_set_link_quality() > was already fixed by r258085. > > 2nd breakage introduced by r258035 seems to be fixed by the patch. > Because 2nd breakage was introduced before 1st breakage was fixed, > we faced to a difficulty tracking down the problem. > I don't know a meaning of a parameter .calib_need, > but it is something wrong and it is corrected by the patch. > > -- > Kaho Toshikazu > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmonhoD_=drOLsQ4WLdcQK8S6w76jXP9-1ZEE%2B=pDGwPJjw>