From owner-freebsd-wireless@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jan 13 05:53:25 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-wireless@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01770BC2;
 Mon, 13 Jan 2014 05:53:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ns.kevlo.org (220-135-115-6.HINET-IP.hinet.net [220.135.115.6])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256
 bits)) (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B813158B;
 Mon, 13 Jan 2014 05:53:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from srg.kevlo.org (mail.kevlo.org [220.135.115.6])
 by ns.kevlo.org (8.14.6/8.14.6) with ESMTP id s0D5qXvd020240;
 Mon, 13 Jan 2014 13:53:03 +0800 (CST)
 (envelope-from kevlo@FreeBSD.org)
Message-ID: <52D37F29.4000607@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 13:52:41 +0800
From: Kevin Lo <kevlo@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Erich Dollansky <erichsfreebsdlist@alogt.com>
Subject: Re: IWN performance very bad with 10.0-RC5
References: <CAN6yY1skA-x=-JLf+WQ0GJdSmHugqmSX2Um2zWkKB_cULxwsSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140111132338.7a7fc14c@X220.alogt.com>
 <CAJ-VmokkmAuLCJo01yjMGT-is3ET-pigY6BHhk0pfROQ=UMJcg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140111133610.313a4bca@X220.alogt.com>
 <CAJ-Vmomo=0=6Yc6hQ02uBYfuyYibnYdsCMVOKm91Kxya2LOKwQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140112143614.3313f509@X220.alogt.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140112143614.3313f509@X220.alogt.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com>, freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions of 802.11 stack,
 tools device driver development." <freebsd-wireless.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-wireless>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-wireless-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-wireless/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-wireless-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-wireless>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-wireless-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 05:53:25 -0000


On 2014/01/12 14:36, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:45:59 -0800
> Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
>> Please help dig up which change broke it. Even just test out the head
>> iwn code from 6 months ago.
> I came to a very strange result. I have iwn in the kernel since June
> 2012 using 10. I also have had run in the kernel of another machine
> since February 2011. I could not even add runfw to the kernel those
> days running some 8 stable. I kept it that way until now.

This issue was solved by gonzo in r252064.

>
> run was always working. iwn gave problems starting between August and
> November of last year on my access point but still worked on other
> places. I used iwn to connect successfully to another wireless network
> mid November 2013.
>
> After adding the firmware to the kernel for both iwn and run, I could
> compile the kernel and iwn started to work. runfw did not break
> compilation.
>
> I wonder now if the iwn or run could even work without firmware or if
> the firmware was automatically loaded even when iwn or run where
> compiled into the kernel.

run(4) requires a firmware to function.  The firmware is automatically
loaded if and only if you compile runfw(4) as module and run(4)
compiled into the kernel.

>
> Erich

     Kevin