W dniu 11 grudnia 2010 18:22 użytkownik Larry Finger <[email protected]> napisał: > On 12/11/2010 11:16 AM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> W dniu 11 grudnia 2010 09:51 użytkownik Eric Garrido <[email protected]> >> napisał: >>> On 2010-12-01 8:55pm, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >>>>> I'm away for the NA holiday, but I can try to verify I have 1) and >>>>> then poke at this on Sunday. I'll let you know. >>>> >>>> Ping? :) >>> >>> Ack. My apologies. Life got in the way (giving notice to my employer, >>> when one would think I'd work *less* afterward, but the opposite has >>> proven to be true). I should be *actually* able to do this tomorrow, >>> and if need be, on Sunday. >> >> Great, thanks :) >> >> Larry: when you noticed this fix on your machine, did you use same >> config for building new kernel as was used for earlier (distro?) one? > > No. I always trim the module list to match the hardware on the machine, and > add > some module hacking options that they leave off. > > I need to go back to 2.6.34 to verify that I do get DMA errors with that > kernel.
I don't want to try be smarter than you... ;) but is that possible you used distro's 2.6.34, and then directly switched to self-compiled 2.6.35? Then difference in frequency of DMA errors could be matter of kernel configuration. Of course, as you said, compiling 2.6.34 with your standard configuration would explain that. -- Rafał _______________________________________________ b43-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/b43-dev
