2009/4/13 Bob Copeland :
> Here are a few random patches I have sitting in my local tree, currently
> based before the ath5k/9k merge. The last one comes from a perl
> script I wrote to check the initvals (also wrote one to check rfgain
> values, but no errors there). Comments welcome.
>
> Bob Co
This patch simplifies the code used to detect when the
self-linked DMA buffer is still in use by hardware, by
checking the hardware's rxdp register instead of looking
at the software buffer list.
Signed-off-by: Bob Copeland
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c | 24
d
Current code uses int types, but both modparams are boolean values.
Changes-licensed-under: 3-Clause-BSD
Signed-off-by: Bob Copeland
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c |4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c
b/drivers/net
Grabbing an ath5k_buf then dropping the lock is racy because the
referenced descriptor can be obtained in another thread and released
before the buffer is handed to the hardware. Likewise, manipulating
sc->rxlink without the lock can lead to having multiple self-linked
hardware descriptors.
Chang
This patch corrects a few errors in the initvals tables to match those
in the HAL tables. Namely, remove a couple of repetitions, fix some
turbo mode errors, and correct a register for the CCK rate power table.
Changes-licensed-under: ISC
Signed-off-by: Bob Copeland
---
drivers/net/wireless/at
Here are a few random patches I have sitting in my local tree, currently
based before the ath5k/9k merge. The last one comes from a perl
script I wrote to check the initvals (also wrote one to check rfgain
values, but no errors there). Comments welcome.
Bob Copeland (5):
ath5k: use bool for m
For embedded platforms, beacon transmission can be starved when
flooded with data packets. Prioritize beacons by giving the beacon
queue the first shot when the isr completes.
Changes-licensed-under: 3-Clause-BSD
Signed-off-by: Bob Copeland
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c |2 +-
1 fi
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 02:14:55AM +0200, Andreas Seidler wrote:
> > Yup, it's normal. A pending patch will remove the message.
> >
> but i dont want to get rid of this message, i dont want to loose my
> connection to AP while scanning...
Understood - see this thread for an explanation of what