From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 12 20:00:56 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9647016A402 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 2006 20:00:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from beaker@hot.pl) Received: from v00052.home.net.pl (hot.pl [212.85.96.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5A96443D48 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 2006 20:00:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from beaker@hot.pl) Received: from 193.19.147.90 (HELO ?172.16.3.14?) (beaker.hot@home@193.19.147.90) by matrix01b.home.net.pl with SMTP; Sun, 12 Mar 2006 20:00:49 -0000 Message-ID: <44147DFF.8070408@hot.pl> Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 21:01:03 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Krzysztof_J=EAdruczyk?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20041020 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: current@freebsd.org, wpaul@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Subject: if_ndis.c breakage in rev 1.114 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 20:00:57 -0000 Hi, I have performed upgrade on my IBM T41 from RELENG_5_3 to RELENG_6 today (I've been delaying that upgrade for some time...). Went moreless smooth, but ndis0 stopped working (panic when trying to assiociate with access point). Long story made short: this patch makes ndis working again for me (I'm sending this message from the upgraded laptop, which proves my point well enough I guess ;) --- /usr/src/sys/dev/if_ndis/if_ndis.c~ Fri Dec 16 18:33:47 2005 +++ /usr/src/sys/dev/if_ndis/if_ndis.c Sun Mar 12 20:20:11 2006 @@ -2509,7 +2509,7 @@ return(ENOENT); } - len = 4; + len = 0; error = ndis_get_info(sc, OID_802_11_BSSID_LIST, NULL, &len); if (error != ENOSPC) len = 65536; I think I have spotted obvious commit mistake, since log message for rev. 1.114 is clear about what is done here ("if using a length of 0 yields anything besides the expected error case, we arbitrarily assume a length of 64K"). -- Best regards, Krzysztof Jędruczyk