Note: I am not a developer, just a user with different sleeping habits, and so responded first. Don't take the FIRST response as the BEST response, just the first.
First, the 4306 is an older car and certainly is well supported by the bcm43xx code, much better so than the 4318. Second, the original bcm43xx code uses v.3 of the virmware. Thew new bcm43xx_mac80211 code (default in F7) uses v.4 of the firmware. The original works best in kernel 2.6.21-rc3 or better (other than F7). The new works best in the wireless-dev tree available via git. Lastly, there is a known POWER problem, which results in better transmission if the transmission rates are reduced. Please include: 1. root# uname -a 2. root# dmesg | grep bcm 3. root# iwconfig and if you're not actually connected it sometimes helps to add 4. root# iwlist eth1 scan (or iwlist wlan0 scan or whatever your interface is called) I hope this information has helped rather than hurt, Kind regards, Ehud Gavron Tucson AZ USA Toronto: Paul Tracy. Silverstone: Lewis Hamilton: Lime Rock: McNish/Capello or Pirro/Werner Daytone: JPM IndyOvalDoodle: WTFC Andreas Peer wrote: > I don't know if this matters, but I have a Acer Ferrari 3400 notebook, > and according to the device list on the web site, the wireless chip > should be the following: > - chip id: 4318 > - product id: 0x4318 > - subsystem vendor id: 0x1468 > - subsystem product id 0x0312, > but instead lspci shows me that the notebook contains a chip with > - chip id: 4306 > - product id: 0x4320 > - subsystem vendor id: 0x185f > - subsystem product id 0x1220. > It is to original chip that was contained when I bought the notebook. > Maybe the information on the device site is not accurate, or Acer put > different chips inside their Ferrari 3400 notebooks? > > Another question: The driver works, but it has a much lower range than > the Windows driver, i.e. I am not able to get a connection in places > where on Windows I can connect with 36 MB/s and a good signal quality. > Is this a known limitation? I think some time ago I read that bcm43xx > uses firmware version 2.x, while the Windows drivers are already using > version 3.x. Is that the problem, and is there a hope that the receiving > quality will improve in the future? > > Last, but not least I want to say that i appreciate your work and I want > to thank you for what you have than for the Open Source community! > > Andreas > _______________________________________________ > Bcm43xx-dev mailing list > Bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev > _______________________________________________ Bcm43xx-dev mailing list Bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev
