Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 21:23:31 +0200 From: "Cedric GROSS" <cg@cgross.info> To: "'Adrian Chadd'" <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org Subject: RE: [IWN] Reviw split 2 Message-ID: <001e01ce907e$f1daf220$d590d660$@info> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmonRBrVCZu9dshSEiVxH9=0LhHdxr5tew4tsN1A5R9f0Sw@mail.gmail.com> References: <51f3f0ce.055a420a.2e1e.fffff220SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com> <CAJ-VmokCVB5kNY44hJLbAfOb1DMSHmJAG3QTUZYhmPL1gHwMwA@mail.gmail.com> <002d01ce8c46$a13b23d0$e3b16b70$@info> <CAJ-Vmon4hMbgFKaWva3-HhcJv=eUXKwX7s0uPcD9Nu9g86QEbA@mail.gmail.com> <002701ce8e03$c033f640$409be2c0$@info> <CAJ-Vmo=yZXdKuXZ85bXs-uG2tAmcZFMAgFXCswnVBk2PUmaXfQ@mail.gmail.com> <002401ce8f5f$fc5ad780$f5108680$@info> <CAJ-VmoniUozz48U0MHhF4sAsrJt6sd06Q9UESRFG9kOXSB2ObQ@mail.gmail.com> <001001ce903b$e77a5f70$b66f1e50$@info> <CAJ-VmonRBrVCZu9dshSEiVxH9=0LhHdxr5tew4tsN1A5R9f0Sw@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> De : adrian.chadd@gmail.com [mailto:adrian.chadd@gmail.com] De la part > de Adrian Chadd > Envoyé : samedi 3 août 2013 20:20 > À : Cedric GROSS > Cc : freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org > Objet : Re: [IWN] Reviw split 2 > > On 3 August 2013 04:23, Cedric GROSS <cg@cgross.info> wrote: > > >> Can you please post an updated diff against what's in -HEAD now? > > > > As requested here is full patch. > > Thanks! > > > It should. 4965 part was not impacted. But Don't you said that full > > patch break your 5100 ? > > Yup, it is breaking it very quickly. I'll try this patch against -HEAD > and see what happens. Ok. > > But, there's ~ 4000 lines of patch to review. Some bits are easy to > merge, some bits aren't easy to merge. :) > It's surely in parameters part that there's a fail. May be will end by that. > Thanks! What would you like to merge next? Prepare for context switching (the sc->rxon modification), it's still modification without adding functionality. And after that, adding context switching with PAN support, should not break your NIC. Next, may be parameter by parameter, so we will see where is break. With bapt help, I'm also pointing a problem with AMRR. With time, rate is still decreasing because of cumulative ackfailcnt transmit to ieee80211_ratectl_tx_complete. What kind of value does this function wait ? Absolute number or relative to the previous call ? Also, why do you send it by ref in iwn_tx_done ? > > -adrian Cedrichelp
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?001e01ce907e$f1daf220$d590d660$>