Re: What driver should I use for 'intel centrino wireless-N 2200 BGN'?
[snip] Welcome to FreeBSD wireless. :-) Where there's like two of us pulling double-duty, and a few others helping out here and there. I think the main problem with the intel card is that the _linux_ driver isn't yet stable, so unless we find someone who knows the NIC/firmware very well, we're stuck with that. Adrian ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: What driver should I use for 'intel centrino wireless-N 2200 BGN'?
On 5 January 2013 21:04, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The best thing I can suggest right now is trying the linux driver out
> and if it works better, working out what the driver is / isn't doing
> correctly.
Bernhard Schmidt, an expert in the area, is having a hard time
figuring it out. I, with zero experience in the area, no testing
hardware (just my one nic), am going to have an easier time to figure
this out?
> I suspect that if you simply wait for something to happen, it's not
> going to happen.
This assumes I have the time to work on this.
Currently *all three* of my nics do not work on HEAD. I chasing down
one of them on -usb now with hps. iwn is the second. The last is alc
which I've been told the vendor may be working on (and db is working
on as well).
Furthermore my main development computer (which had working internet)
has a broken motherboard which I am waiting for a replacement for.
I also work during the day and take a course on the Weekend. I simply
*do not* have the time to track this down.
When I do have to work on FreeBSD stuff I have { ports, src, doc }
stuff that I already do in addition to working on closing PRs, chasing
down users, etc.
Sometimes the answer isn't "please do more work". At this time I
*can't* be the one tracking down the iwn bug / missing feature.
--
Eitan Adler
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: What driver should I use for 'intel centrino wireless-N 2200 BGN'?
Hi, The best thing I can suggest right now is trying the linux driver out and if it works better, working out what the driver is / isn't doing correctly. I suspect that if you simply wait for something to happen, it's not going to happen. Adrian On 5 January 2013 17:00, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 25 December 2012 22:06, Eitan Adler wrote: >> On 10 October 2012 13:54, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: >>> On Wednesday 10 October 2012 15:51:24 Denise H. G. wrote: > none3@pci0:3:0:0: class=0x028000 card=0x42228086 > chip=0x08918086 > rev=0xc4 hdr=0x00 > > Is there a driver for that under FreeBSD 9.1-PRERELEASE? >>> >>> No, not yet. I'm having a hard figuring out the new firmware API for >>> those new devices. Working on it.. >>> >> ... >>> Intel Centrino Wireless-N 2200 BGN >> >> Has there been any progress on this? > > ping? > > I have this wireless card and would love to use the internet. :) > > > -- > Eitan Adler > ___ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: What driver should I use for 'intel centrino wireless-N 2200 BGN'?
On 25 December 2012 22:06, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 10 October 2012 13:54, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: >> On Wednesday 10 October 2012 15:51:24 Denise H. G. wrote: >>> > none3@pci0:3:0:0: class=0x028000 card=0x42228086 chip=0x08918086 >>> > rev=0xc4 hdr=0x00 >>> > >>> > Is there a driver for that under FreeBSD 9.1-PRERELEASE? >> >> No, not yet. I'm having a hard figuring out the new firmware API for >> those new devices. Working on it.. >> > ... >> Intel Centrino Wireless-N 2200 BGN > > Has there been any progress on this? ping? I have this wireless card and would love to use the internet. :) -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kern/171697: [ip6] [ndp] panic when changing routes
Synopsis: [ip6] [ndp] panic when changing routes Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-net->ae Responsible-Changed-By: ae Responsible-Changed-When: Sat Jan 5 22:22:46 UTC 2013 Responsible-Changed-Why: Take it. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=171697 ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kern/174851: [bxe] [patch] UDP checksum offload is wrong in bxe driver
--- On Fri, 1/4/13, Willem Jan Withagen wrote: > From: Willem Jan Withagen > Subject: Re: kern/174851: [bxe] [patch] UDP checksum offload is wrong in bxe > driver > To: "Barney Cordoba" > Cc: "Garrett Cooper" , freebsd-net@freebsd.org, "Adrian > Chadd" , "David Christensen" , > lini...@freebsd.org > Date: Friday, January 4, 2013, 9:41 AM > On 2013-01-01 0:04, Barney Cordoba > wrote: > > > The statement above "assumes" that there is a benefit. > voIP packets > > are short, so the benefit of offloading is reduced. > There is some > > delay added by the hardware, and there are cpu cycles > used in managing > > the offload code. So those operations not only muddy > the code, > > but they may not be faster than simply doing the > checksum on a much, much > > faster cpu. > > Forgoing all the discussions on performance and possible > penalties in > drivers. > > I think there is a large set of UDP streams (and growing) > that do use > larger packets. > > The video streaming we did used a size of header(14)+7*188, > which is the > max number of MPEG packet to fit into anything with an MTU > < 1500. > > Receiving those on small embedded devices which can do HW > check-summing > is very beneficial there. > On the large servers we would generate up to 5Gbit of > outgoing streams. > I'm sure that offloading UDP checks would be an advantage as > well. > (They did run mainly Linux, but FreeBSD would also work) > > Unfortunately most of the infrastructure has been taken > down, so it is > no longer possible to verify any of the assumptions. > > --WjW If you haven't benchmarked it, then you're just guessing. That's my point. Its like SMP in freeBSD 4. People bought big, honking machines and the big expensive machines were slower than a single core system at less than half the price. Just because something sounds better doesn't mean that it is better. BC ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
