Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 20:28:43 +0200 From: Ian FREISLICH <ianf@clue.co.za> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Subject: Re: More if_ath churn coming your way! Message-ID: <E1PgiCZ-0000hL-Dy@clue.co.za> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikWQ4G6P-ePSDv6eXpUfnZ7vvDTSqSGr5sB4Pxe@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTikWQ4G6P-ePSDv6eXpUfnZ7vvDTSqSGr5sB4Pxe@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikBpHcimOvSGdppc9CdhWguZNbTUEwan%2BQ172QT@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 20 January 2011 13:51, Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > I'm in the process of merging in the non-intrusive changes to the > > if_ath code into -HEAD. > > Ok, so I lied - the ANI changes were slightly intrusive. But all in > all the code was just shuffled around a bit. > > Someone's reported that the AR9285 was once stable but now isn't. I'd > really appreciate it if others who are using AR9280/AR9285 chipsets > would test this out and get back to me. Oddly enough, I think my AR9285 uses less power now. This I do know however: at boot, it associates much much faster. I used to have to wait at least 10 seconds for "the default route interface". Now, association and DHCP blazes through without pausing. Ian -- Ian Freislich
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1PgiCZ-0000hL-Dy>