Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 15 May 2010 14:13:12 -0700
From:      Weongyo Jeong <weongyo.jeong@gmail.com>
To:        Gustau P??rez <gperez@entel.upc.edu>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Call for Test and Review: bwn(4) - another Broadcom Wireless driver
Message-ID:  <20100515211312.GB1295@weongyo>
In-Reply-To: <4BEEB792.3040105@entel.upc.edu>
References:  <20100303082833.GB22865@weongyo> <20100303111014.6564ea1e.ray@dlink.ua> <20100312231333.GZ1295@weongyo> <4BD2201E.3090409@entel.upc.edu> <20100424231755.GI65380@weongyo> <4BD4A928.8020901@entel.upc.edu> <20100506190653.GA31100@weongyo> <58220.88.15.97.205.1273248485.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu> <20100510195622.GA1295@weongyo> <4BEEB792.3040105@entel.upc.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 05:02:42PM +0200, Gustau P??rez wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> En/na Weongyo Jeong ha escrit:
> > On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 06:08:05PM +0200, Gustavo Perez Querol wrote:
> >>> Hello Gustau, I'm so sorry for belated response that I had no time to
> >>> read and work email and wireless stuffs.
> >>>
> >>> Could you please test this symptom with attached patch?  It looks in
> >>> CURRENT it missed to initialize a ratectl when it associates with AP.
> >>>
> >>   The patch made the machine to panic. I think it happened when launching
> >> the supplicant. In fact, right now it works by putting the RF switch to
> >> OFF. As soon as I change it to ON the machine panics.
> >>
> >>   It get a trap 12, with two reasons : page fault and "bufwrite, buffer is
> >> not busy?"
> >>
> >>   I'm running 9.0/AMD64 from 1 of May (don't know exact svn revision).
> >>
> >>   Do you want me to test anything else ?
> >
> > OK.  The patch is ready to test.  Could you please test it with attached
> > patch?
> >
> > regards,
> > Weongyo Jeong
> >
> 
>    It worked fine with current. I still haven't tested it a few hours,
> let's see if it works. Thanks !
> 
>    However, right now I'm testing zfs with the same laptop (with a
> different HDD) and unfortunately I'm seeing the same with STABLE.
> Tons of :
> 
>              "bwn0: unsupported rate 0"
> 
>    I wonder if the patch you sent will work with stable's source code ...

Recently the ratectl framwork was MFC to STABLE_8 so it could cause this
problem.  I'll MFC my patch to STABLE_8 as soon as possible.

regards,
Weongyo Jeong




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100515211312.GB1295>