The sender domain has a DMARC Reject/Quarantine policy which disallows sending mailing list messages using the original "From" header.
To mitigate this problem, the original message has been wrapped automatically by the mailing list software.
--- Begin Message ---On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 4:15 PM Tomasz Maciej Nowak <tome...@o2.pl> wrote: > > Since the beginning there's been an issue with initializing the Atheros > based MiniPCIe wlan cards. Here's an example of kerenel log: > > advk-pcie d0070000.pcie: Posted PIO Response Status: CA,0xe00 @ 0x3c > advk-pcie d0070000.pcie: Posted PIO Response Status: CA,0xe00 @ 0x44 > advk-pcie d0070000.pcie: Posted PIO Response Status: CA,0xe00 @ 0x4 > ath9k 0000:00:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) > advk-pcie d0070000.pcie: Posted PIO Response Status: CA,0xe00 @ 0x3c > advk-pcie d0070000.pcie: Posted PIO Response Status: CA,0xe00 @ 0xc > advk-pcie d0070000.pcie: Posted PIO Response Status: CA,0xe00 @ 0x4 > advk-pcie d0070000.pcie: Posted PIO Response Status: CA,0xe00 @ 0x40 > ath9k 0000:00:00.0: request_irq failed > advk-pcie d0070000.pcie: Posted PIO Response Status: CA,0xe00 @ 0x4 > ath9k: probe of 0000:00:00.0 failed with error -22 > > The same happens for ath5k cards, while ath10k card didn't appear at > all (not detected). Following the issue on esppressobin.net forum [1] > the workaround seems to be limiting the speed of PCIe bridge to 1st > generation. This fixed the initialization of ath5k, ath9k and ath10k > cards. The change shouldn't affect the performance for wireless cards, > it could reduce the performance of storage controller cards but since > OpenWrt focuses on wireless connectivity, fixing compatibility with > wireless cards should be a priority. > For the record, the iwlwifi and mt76 cards were not affected by this > issue. does this meant that the PCIe link speed depends on the board? the PCI dt-bindings already specify a "max-link-speed" property, see [0] there's even a helper function to parse that property: of_pci_get_max_link_speed this would give you control over the PCIe link speed per board (I am assuming that the mvebu target uses devicetree). additionally this would allow you to send the patch upstream so OpenWrt doesn't have to carry custom patches around forever what do you think? Regards Martin [0] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/pci.txt
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/listinfo/openwrt-devel
