From owner-freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org Mon Dec 5 05:26:16 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-wireless@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B346C67F58 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 05:26:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gonzo@bluezbox.com) Received: from id.bluezbox.com (id.bluezbox.com [45.55.20.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BB47A2F for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 05:26:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gonzo@bluezbox.com) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=id.bluezbox.com) by id.bluezbox.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cDln4-000Alr-7A for freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org; Sun, 04 Dec 2016 21:26:14 -0800 Received: (from gonzo@localhost) by id.bluezbox.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id uB55QDIO041406 for freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org; Sun, 4 Dec 2016 21:26:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gonzo@bluezbox.com) X-Authentication-Warning: id.bluezbox.com: gonzo set sender to gonzo@bluezbox.com using -f Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2016 21:26:13 -0800 From: Oleksandr Tymoshenko To: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problem with Intel Centrino Wireless-N 1000 on ARM Message-ID: <20161205052613.GA41330@bluezbox.com> References: <9770367E-AEC9-4849-9F9E-47B4E35F724F@bluezbox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <9770367E-AEC9-4849-9F9E-47B4E35F724F@bluezbox.com> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD/11.0-RELEASE-p2 (amd64) User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27) X-Spam-Level: -- X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "id.bluezbox.com", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see The administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Oleksandr Tymoshenko (gonzo@bluezbox.com) wrote: > Hello, > > I am trying to get Intel Centrino Wireless-N 1000 working on one of > my ARM boards. iwn(4) recognizes it but I can’t associate it with > AP or get scan results. I am not sure whether it’s an iwn on ARM problem > or this card in general. I’d appreciate any hints on how to debug this > issue. > > My test script: > sysctl dev.iwn.0.debug=0x8007 > ifconfig wlan create wlandev iwn0 > wlandebug -i wlan0 +dumppkts+scan+debug > ifconfig wlan0 up scan .. skipped .. > without any RX frames or scan results. [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: bluezbox.com] X-BeenThere: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussions of 802.11 stack, tools device driver development." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 05:26:16 -0000 Oleksandr Tymoshenko (gonzo@bluezbox.com) wrote: > Hello, > > I am trying to get Intel Centrino Wireless-N 1000 working on one of > my ARM boards. iwn(4) recognizes it but I can’t associate it with > AP or get scan results. I am not sure whether it’s an iwn on ARM problem > or this card in general. I’d appreciate any hints on how to debug this > issue. > > My test script: > sysctl dev.iwn.0.debug=0x8007 > ifconfig wlan create wlandev iwn0 > wlandebug -i wlan0 +dumppkts+scan+debug > ifconfig wlan0 up scan .. skipped .. > without any RX frames or scan results. Never mind, Adrian identified missing link: it was lack of antennas. Once I connected one - card started receiving frames. There is some weird behaviour with scan, but association with non-protected AP seems to work. I'll run more tests later -- gonzo