freebsd stable - Aug 2005 - cvs commit: src/sys/net80211 ieee80211.c ieee80211_input.c ieee80211_ioctl.c ieee80211_node.c ieee80211_node.h ieee80211_output.c ieee80211_proto.c ieee80211_proto.h ieee80211_var.h src/sys/dev/ath if_ath.c src/sys/dev/ipw if_ipw.c ...

On Saturday 13 August 2005 14:27, Sam Leffler wrote:
> [Not sure why you're sending this to cvs-all]
Oops, freebsd-stable@ is probably better.
> Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> > ipw is still broken [for me]..
>
> Sorry but that wasn't the question.  I don't believe the commit you
are
> responding to changed the behaviour of the ipw driver and that was what
> I wanted to confirm.
OK, same old behaviour then :)
> > [inchoate 13:20] ~ >sudo ifconfig ipw0
> > ipw0: flags=8802<BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
> >         inet 192.168.1.100 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255
> >         ether 00:04:23:a4:12:74
> >         media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet autoselect (autoselect)
> >         status: no carrier
> >         ssid dons channel 6
> >         authmode OPEN privacy OFF txpowmax 100
>
> Someone reported the ipw driver at the author's web site works
(better);
> you might try that.  Unfortunately the code in the tree is not being
> maintained so far as I can tell.
Hmm.. Maybe because it hasn't been broken :)
(ie it's older).

I will try and search for the date of breakage to provide some more 
information.

It is somewhat annoying that both ipw and ndis are hosed and used to work on 
at least a basic level.
> I don't believe the ipw driver does honors any of the net80211 debug
> controls.
I see..

-- 
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
  -- Andrew Tanenbaum
GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20050813/3384ee2c/attachment.bin

Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> On Saturday 13 August 2005 14:27, Sam Leffler wrote:
> 
>>[Not sure why you're sending this to cvs-all]
> 
> 
> Oops, freebsd-stable@ is probably better.
Not really, but whatever.
> 
> 
>>Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>>
>>>ipw is still broken [for me]..
>>
>>Sorry but that wasn't the question.  I don't believe the commit
you are
>>responding to changed the behaviour of the ipw driver and that was what
>>I wanted to confirm.
> 
> 
> OK, same old behaviour then :)
> 
> 
>>>[inchoate 13:20] ~ >sudo ifconfig ipw0
>>>ipw0: flags=8802<BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
>>>        inet 192.168.1.100 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast
192.168.1.255
>>>        ether 00:04:23:a4:12:74
>>>        media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet autoselect (autoselect)
>>>        status: no carrier
>>>        ssid dons channel 6
>>>        authmode OPEN privacy OFF txpowmax 100
>>
>>Someone reported the ipw driver at the author's web site works
(better);
>>you might try that.  Unfortunately the code in the tree is not being
>>maintained so far as I can tell.
> 
> 
> Hmm.. Maybe because it hasn't been broken :)
> (ie it's older).
> 
> I will try and search for the date of breakage to provide some more 
> information.
> 
> It is somewhat annoying that both ipw and ndis are hosed and used to work
on
> at least a basic level.
The ipw and iwi drivers (at least) have never worked right so far as I 
can tell.  At one point I tried the iwi driver and it kinda worked but 
failed in many common scenarios and in general was very fragile.  I no 
longer have the facilities to even test these drivers and given that I 
know of no cardbus cards w/ intel parts in them it's unlikely I ever 
will unless someone wants to donate a laptop dedicated to testing.

When these drivers (as well as others) were committed to the tree I 
warned the author they had issues (actually I told him _before_ they 
were committed).  I explained that they were violating net80211 api's 
reaching inside data structures where they should not be and otherwise 
had problems that were going to cause trouble (e.g. the locking of the 
rx path was wrong).  When the changes were committed to "support WPA"
I
again explained that the changes were wrong.  All these warnings were 
ignored.  I cannot be responsible for drivers that are unmaintained and 
written in the ways I've described.  The ndis support has a similarly 
incestuous relationship with the net80211 layer and it's author too has 
been distant of late.  A lot of this is a byproduct of C's inability to 
properly hide data.  When you need to expose information across files 
anyone can access it and in this case it enables drivers to be written 
that break when you change the internal workings of net80211.  I am very 
happy to see new drivers in the tree but unless they are maintained it's 
not clear they should be incorporated.  This is in fact the reason I 
didn't break these drivers into the tree in the first place (i.e. I had 
no time to maintain them).
>>I don't believe the ipw driver does honors any of the net80211 debug
>>controls.
> 
> 
> I see..
>