Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 21:04:49 -0700 (PDT) From: PseudoCylon <moonlightakkiy@yahoo.ca> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFT: if_ath HAL refactoring Message-ID: <367708.1588.qm@web51805.mail.re2.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim84b-O7XegYbT7V7NwWezBp1pLe2w6sHo2Xnnt@mail.gmail.com> References: <20100919120012.A77371065674@hub.freebsd.org> <260103.20986.qm@web51802.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <AANLkTim84b-O7XegYbT7V7NwWezBp1pLe2w6sHo2Xnnt@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----- Original Message ---- > From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> > To: PseudoCylon <moonlightakkiy@yahoo.ca> > 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 <moonlightakkiy@yahoo.ca> 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) > > So, use it at your own discretion. > > Want to put together a patch? sure! > > Does it introduce issues in the non-11n case? No, only in 11n mode. What I have found so far is that Ralink's driver checks MAC address of other end and identify atheros chip by oui. Then, sets special prot mode for it. Does this ring a bell? Has node lock in ieee80211_node_timeout() cased dead lock in HT + AP + bridge? AK
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?367708.1588.qm>