Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 16:28:20 -0700 From: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com> To: Matt Dawson <matt@chronos.org.uk> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ral(4) on 8-RC1 Message-ID: <4AC92F94.4020106@errno.com> In-Reply-To: <200910032240.45357.matt@chronos.org.uk> References: <200910021726.33663.matt@chronos.org.uk> <4AC797E2.2050709@errno.com> <200910032240.45357.matt@chronos.org.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matt Dawson wrote: > On Saturday 03 Oct 2009 19:28:50 you wrote: >> ral probably does not populate it's initial channel list according to >> the device capabilities. I'm guessing it falls back on the system code >> to do that and it fills in only channels 1-11. This means future >> changes to regulatory cannot setup the channels you want--it's not >> allowed to add channels that are not listed in the "device >> capabilities". > > That makes sense. Given that my 2561 card has "ETSI" stamped on its label, > one would think it's the card's job to report to the driver what it > supports. If the driver doesn't request this, the safest bet is the lowest > common denominator that should be legal everywhere, 11 channels at FCC > spec. Got it. > > Just a quick question, if I may: Are the maxpower specs of regdomain.xml in > dBm? ETSI is max 20dBm ERP at 2.4GHz. Euro spec cards are only capable of > ~100mW anyway, most more like 60mW and your average foot of RG-174 will > knock nearly a dB off at 2.4GHz, so it hardly matters, but I'm curious. The > manpage doesn't specify what the fields mean. maxpower are expressed as dBm. > >> You can hack ral to setup a proper channel list at attach or you can >> make a private hack to net80211 to populate the channel list w/ those >> channels you want. Either is simple. > > Thank you. I'll probably try the local hack for now, but hacking ral (and > probably iwi now I finally have that working, which does exactly the same > thing) to do the right thing would be a better long-term solution. > > To the list: Does anyone have any idea why the iwi firmware modules build > by default on i386 and not on amd64? I know from experience that manually > building them on 7.1 amd64 didn't work, but it now works well on 8 except > for the messages about mcast/promisc update separation. I had problems w/ the iwi firmware on 64-bit so set the build to i386 only. The problems I had were relocation errors and noone could help; if those are gone then building the fw image for amd64 should be fine. Whether the driver works is another matter... Sam
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4AC92F94.4020106>