On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 4:43 PM, George Pediaditis < g.pediaditis1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> thanks for the reply. I will try it next week when i have more time. > If that doesnt work im thinking if its possible to go from current > back to stable. If i try current and i have problems. It looks > possible but it isnt in FAQ > https://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#Flavors > im wondering if im missing something. > You are. As was recently pointed out in another thread by Nick Holland, you can't go backwards in time-of-release except by re-installation. But you can back up and restore. I've used Clonezilla on OpenBSD systems and it works well for bare-metal restores. > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:52 PM, Stefan Sperling <s...@stsp.name> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:24:50PM +0200, George Pediaditis wrote: > >> i currently use stable. I updated my system a week ago. How stable is > current? > >> I use my laptop for programming (java) and im a bit skeptical about > >> running current. > > > > Generally, -current is fine. But if you don't follow our development > > process at least a bit you might upgrade at a bad moment and run into > > surprises. Most issues will fix themselves after a few days and we're > > always welcoming reports from users running -current since that really > > helps us make the next release better. > > > > I have spent many hours making many changes since 6.0 which fixed > > several issues in the iwm driver and the wireless framework. > > All these fixes will of course ship in 6.1. > > I'm sorry but this kind of problem is not something we officially > > backport fixes to -stable for because it just takes too much time > > on top of all the time already spent on development for -current. > > > > That said, I'll include one fix I made below. I don't know if it > > provides a huge improvement in isolation but if you really want > > to stick with -stable then this patch is worth a shot. I know that > > it compiles but I haven't run this on a 6.0 system myself. > > > > Index: if_iwm.c > > =================================================================== > > RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/pci/if_iwm.c,v > > retrieving revision 1.132 > > retrieving revision 1.133 > > diff -u -p -r1.132 -r1.133 > > --- if_iwm.c 12 Sep 2016 10:18:26 -0000 1.132 > > +++ if_iwm.c 21 Sep 2016 12:56:43 -0000 1.133 > > @@ -4896,6 +4896,7 @@ iwm_ack_rates(struct iwm_softc *sc, stru > > int *ofdm_rates) > > { > > struct ieee80211_node *ni = &in->in_ni; > > + struct ieee80211_rateset *rs = &ni->ni_rates; > > int lowest_present_ofdm = 100; > > int lowest_present_cck = 100; > > uint8_t cck = 0; > > @@ -4904,15 +4905,19 @@ iwm_ack_rates(struct iwm_softc *sc, stru > > > > if (ni->ni_chan == IEEE80211_CHAN_ANYC || > > IEEE80211_IS_CHAN_2GHZ(ni->ni_chan)) { > > - for (i = 0; i <= IWM_LAST_CCK_RATE; i++) { > > + for (i = 0; i < MIN(IWM_FIRST_OFDM_RATE, rs->rs_nrates); > i++) { > > + if ((rs->rs_rates[i] & IEEE80211_RATE_BASIC) == > 0) > > + continue; > > cck |= (1 << i); > > if (lowest_present_cck > i) > > lowest_present_cck = i; > > } > > } > > - for (i = IWM_FIRST_OFDM_RATE; i <= IWM_LAST_NON_HT_RATE; i++) { > > - int adj = i - IWM_FIRST_OFDM_RATE; > > - ofdm |= (1 << adj); > > + for (i = IWM_FIRST_OFDM_RATE; > > + i <= MIN(IWM_LAST_NON_HT_RATE, rs->rs_nrates - 1); i++) { > > + if ((rs->rs_rates[i] & IEEE80211_RATE_BASIC) == 0) > > + continue; > > + ofdm |= (1 << (i - IWM_FIRST_OFDM_RATE)); > > if (lowest_present_ofdm > i) > > lowest_present_ofdm = i; > > }
