Re: ANNOUNCE: SFLC helps developers assess ar5k (enabling free Atheros HAL)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Michael, >> I don't think anyone likes the HAL-based architecture. I don't think >> we will accept a HAL-based driver into the upstream kernel. > > Yeah, wanted to hear that. ;) +1 At least, this way we have a chance to get USB working as well (See http://madwifi.org/ticket/33). OpenBSD seems to have a working driver (if_uath.c) for these USB WLAN sticks. Jochen -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQEVAwUBRVxzGsP9a9GOLSE6AQIeRgf/ZyvmzdhP1+wjVshy2kK0BX+I+lx7y6RO mMmaVXPnXnHhHE4OLcf9Yrnn6d6i6rS+0CUbw60KgQouuvTFSXEFtSpIYRlXGAyj krMCj8bEfHhDEN8iYjbjdhP9Nx1wQ//JGyoBVpZZ5+sro6ik7wv70igFeDZ2IWg6 38ycxDzINaV13ZscpwoHzO3NhvcSs9k99Syrh/nR6/pp+3g2vXmrsYR+hy7DMrE/ bSI9y50h8rz6ZCire1ppDwADyBW5B1OondoRkjFYd3L8zNUu8s8xUHZ0Znz6B/cc yc7jyfQMsBRTUU7VsX3cWuMfA0UGlPn/0MR0+RHRJYHW5bRlStc5Kw== =Ajsn -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: ANNOUNCE: SFLC helps developers assess ar5k (enabling free Atheros HAL)
On Wednesday 15 November 2006 20:21, John W. Linville wrote: > On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 07:42:14PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote: > > > Now that it seems to be ok to use these openbsd sources, should I port > > them to my driver framework? > > I looked over the ar5k code and, well, I don't like it. ;) > > I don't really like having a HAL. I'd rather prefer a "real" driver > > without that HAL obfuscation. > > I don't think anyone likes the HAL-based architecture. I don't think > we will accept a HAL-based driver into the upstream kernel. Yeah, wanted to hear that. ;) > The point is that the ar5k is now safe to be used as a reference and > source of information (and code, as appropriate) without copyright FUD. > Distilling that information into a proper Linux driver is work that > remains to be done. Yeah, ok. I'll look what I can do. First I'll have to read the code. and understand it. DMA stuff seems to be really obfuscated though dozens of callbacks, heh. :) -- Greetings Michael. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: ANNOUNCE: SFLC helps developers assess ar5k (enabling free Atheros HAL)
On Wed, 2006-11-15 at 14:21 -0500, John W. Linville wrote: > On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 07:42:14PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote: > > > Now that it seems to be ok to use these openbsd sources, should I port > > them to my driver framework? > > I looked over the ar5k code and, well, I don't like it. ;) > > I don't really like having a HAL. I'd rather prefer a "real" driver > > without that HAL obfuscation. > > I don't think anyone likes the HAL-based architecture. I don't think > we will accept a HAL-based driver into the upstream kernel. > > The point is that the ar5k is now safe to be used as a reference and > source of information (and code, as appropriate) without copyright FUD. > Distilling that information into a proper Linux driver is work that > remains to be done. there have been several efforts on this before; is it worth revitalizing one of them? Also I suspect that if you merge a provisional driver early, lots of folks will switch to it and start beating on it and fixing the style etc issues... -- if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com Test the interaction between Linux and your BIOS via http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: ANNOUNCE: SFLC helps developers assess ar5k (enabling free Atheros HAL)
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 07:42:14PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote: > Now that it seems to be ok to use these openbsd sources, should I port > them to my driver framework? > I looked over the ar5k code and, well, I don't like it. ;) > I don't really like having a HAL. I'd rather prefer a "real" driver > without that HAL obfuscation. I don't think anyone likes the HAL-based architecture. I don't think we will accept a HAL-based driver into the upstream kernel. The point is that the ar5k is now safe to be used as a reference and source of information (and code, as appropriate) without copyright FUD. Distilling that information into a proper Linux driver is work that remains to be done. John -- John W. Linville [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: ANNOUNCE: SFLC helps developers assess ar5k (enabling free Atheros HAL)
On Wednesday 15 November 2006 04:10, John W. Linville wrote: > It is my pleasure to announce that the SFLC [1] has assisted the ar5k > developers in evaluating the development history of Reyk Floeter's > OpenBSD reverse-engineered Atheros HAL, ar5k [2]. SFLC's assessment > leads to the conclusion that free software developers should not be > worried about using/extending ar5k or porting ar5k to other platforms. > > In the past there were serious questions raised and even dire warnings > made about ar5k's copyright status. The purpose of this statement > is to refute those claims and to publicly clarify ar5k's status > to developers. > > SFLC has made independent inquiries with the OpenBSD team regarding the > development history of ar5k source. The responses received provide > a reasonable basis for SFLC to believe that the OpenBSD developers > who worked on ar5k did not misappropriate code, and that the ar5k > implementation is OpenBSD's original copyrighted work. > > This announcement should serve to remove the cloud which has prevented > progress towards an in-kernel driver for Atheros hardware. This should > be of particular interest to those involved with the DadWifi project [3]. > > I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the folks at the SFLC for > their hard work, and I'd also like to personally thank Luis Rodriguez > for the role he played in coordinating contact between the SFLC and > the community at large. > > Thanks! > > John > > [1] http://www.softwarefreedom.org/ > [2] http://team.vantronix.net/ar5k/ > [3] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdev&m=116113064513921&w=2 So, who is finally going to _DO_ the work? Some of you know that I started an atheros driver at http://bu3sch.de/ath/atheros.git/ It's not really a driver, yet, as nobody got to continue on the specification, so I was stuck. Now that it seems to be ok to use these openbsd sources, should I port them to my driver framework? I looked over the ar5k code and, well, I don't like it. ;) I don't really like having a HAL. I'd rather prefer a "real" driver without that HAL obfuscation. -- Greetings Michael. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
