Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 21:23:31 +0200 From: "Cedric GROSS" <cg@cgross.info> To: "'Adrian Chadd'" <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org Subject: RE: [IWN] Reviw split 2 Message-ID: <001e01ce907e$f1daf220$d590d660$@info> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmonRBrVCZu9dshSEiVxH9=0LhHdxr5tew4tsN1A5R9f0Sw@mail.gmail.com> References: <51f3f0ce.055a420a.2e1e.fffff220SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com> <CAJ-VmokCVB5kNY44hJLbAfOb1DMSHmJAG3QTUZYhmPL1gHwMwA@mail.gmail.com> <002d01ce8c46$a13b23d0$e3b16b70$@info> <CAJ-Vmon4hMbgFKaWva3-HhcJv=eUXKwX7s0uPcD9Nu9g86QEbA@mail.gmail.com> <002701ce8e03$c033f640$409be2c0$@info> <CAJ-Vmo=yZXdKuXZ85bXs-uG2tAmcZFMAgFXCswnVBk2PUmaXfQ@mail.gmail.com> <002401ce8f5f$fc5ad780$f5108680$@info> <CAJ-VmoniUozz48U0MHhF4sAsrJt6sd06Q9UESRFG9kOXSB2ObQ@mail.gmail.com> <001001ce903b$e77a5f70$b66f1e50$@info> <CAJ-VmonRBrVCZu9dshSEiVxH9=0LhHdxr5tew4tsN1A5R9f0Sw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> De=A0: adrian.chadd@gmail.com [mailto:adrian.chadd@gmail.com] De la = part > de Adrian Chadd > Envoy=E9=A0: samedi 3 ao=FBt 2013 20:20 > =C0=A0: Cedric GROSS > Cc=A0: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org > Objet=A0: Re: [IWN] Reviw split 2 >=20 > On 3 August 2013 04:23, Cedric GROSS <cg@cgross.info> wrote: >=20 > >> Can you please post an updated diff against what's in -HEAD now? > > > > As requested here is full patch. >=20 > Thanks! >=20 > > It should. 4965 part was not impacted. But Don't you said that full > > patch break your 5100 ? >=20 > Yup, it is breaking it very quickly. I'll try this patch against -HEAD > and see what happens. Ok. >=20 > But, there's ~ 4000 lines of patch to review. Some bits are easy to > merge, some bits aren't easy to merge. :) >=20 It's surely in parameters part that there's a fail. May be will end by = that. > Thanks! What would you like to merge next? Prepare for context switching (the sc->rxon modification), it's still modification without adding functionality.=20 And after that, adding context switching with PAN support, should not = break your NIC. Next, may be parameter by parameter, so we will see where is break. With bapt help, I'm also pointing a problem with AMRR. With time, rate = is still decreasing because of cumulative ackfailcnt transmit to ieee80211_ratectl_tx_complete. What kind of value does this function wait ? Absolute number or relative = to the previous call ? Also, why do you send it by ref in iwn_tx_done ? >=20 > -adrian Cedric
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?001e01ce907e$f1daf220$d590d660$>