On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:20:09 +0100
Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
> On Thu, 20.01.2011 at 21:17:40 +0100, Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Currently our buildworld relies on groff(1) and vgrind(1) being present
> > in the host system. I have a patch ready that at least makes sure these
> > are
So it's all completely stable for you too right now?
adrian
2011/1/22 Dima Panov :
> Hello!
>
> 22.01.2011, 13:56, "Adrian Chadd" :
>> On 20 January 2011 13:51, Adrian Chadd ; wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I'm in the process of merging in the non-intrusive changes to the
>>> if_ath code
hello!
22.01.2011, 22:19, "Adrian Chadd" :
> So it's all completely stable for you too right now?
>
Yes, almost 7 hours with new kernel and no errors.
Stable as all previous revisions.
Wait a 802.11n support to utilize it with my home and office hotspots :)
> adrian
>
> 2011/1/22 Dima Panov ;
2011/1/22 Dima Panov :
> 22.01.2011, 22:19, "Adrian Chadd" :
>> So it's all completely stable for you too right now?
>>
>
> Yes, almost 7 hours with new kernel and no errors.
> Stable as all previous revisions.
>
> Wait a 802.11n support to utilize it with my home and office hotspots :)
:) That's
Adrian Chadd wrote:
> 2011/1/22 Dima Panov :
>
> > 22.01.2011, 22:19, "Adrian Chadd" :
> This is why I really do need this tested as much as possible. I'll put
> up instructions on how to build if_ath as a module (that's what I'm
> doing on my RELENG_8 EEEPC - I'm running the HEAD if_ath on it for
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:58:25AM +0100, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:20:09 +0100
> Ulrich Sp?rlein wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 20.01.2011 at 21:17:40 +0100, Ulrich Sp?rlein wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Currently our buildworld relies on groff(1) and vgrind(1) being present
> > >
Hi all,
It seems that the latest CURRENT kernel can not be built. I used 'make
buildkernel KERNCONF=CURRENT' to build a new kernel and got an error:
--
>>> Kernel build for CURRENT started on Sun Jan 23 01:03:57 CST 2011
Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 20 January 2011 13:51, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I'm in the process of merging in the non-intrusive changes to the
> > if_ath code into -HEAD.
>
> Ok, so I lied - the ANI changes were slightly intrusive. But all in
> all the code was just shuffled aroun
TB --- 2011-01-22 17:52:23 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 17:52:23 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2011-01-22 17:52:23 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 17:52:35 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 17:52:35 - /usr/bin/c
>Before we go any further could you please confirm that you commented out this
>line in sys/modules/zfs/Makefile:
>
> CFLAGS+=-DDEBUG=1
>
>This turns all kind of ZFS debugging and slows it down a lot, but for the
>correctness testing is invaluable. This will >be turned off once we import ZF
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 23:11:43 +0100
Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
> On Thu, 20.01.2011 at 15:31:03 -0500, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:17:40 +0100
> > Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Currently our buildworld relies on groff(1) and vgrind(1) being
> > > present
TB --- 2011-01-22 19:20:14 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 19:20:14 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc
TB --- 2011-01-22 19:20:14 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 19:20:29 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 19:20:29 - /usr
TB --- 2011-01-22 20:00:04 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 20:00:04 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for sparc64/sparc64
TB --- 2011-01-22 20:00:04 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 20:00:17 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 20:00:17 - /usr
TB --- 2011-01-22 20:09:36 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 20:09:36 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for sparc64/sun4v
TB --- 2011-01-22 20:09:36 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 20:09:44 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 20:09:44 - /usr/b
TB --- 2011-01-22 19:46:49 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 19:46:49 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc64/powerpc
TB --- 2011-01-22 19:46:49 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 19:47:05 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 19:47:05 - /u
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:00 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/pc98
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:00 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:15 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:15 - /usr/bin/c
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:00 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/i386
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:00 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:19 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:19 - /usr/bin/c
On 23 January 2011 02:28, Ian FREISLICH wrote:
>> Someone's reported that the AR9285 was once stable but now isn't. I'd
>> really appreciate it if others who are using AR9280/AR9285 chipsets
>> would test this out and get back to me.
>
> Oddly enough, I think my AR9285 uses less power now. This
On 23 January 2011 01:11, b. f. wrote:
> Would you look to see if any of your improvements can also be used by uath(4)?
Nope, sorry. I can only do two things at a time. :)
Adrian
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/m
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:00 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for amd64/amd64
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:00 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:19 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 21:20:19 - /usr/bin
TB --- 2011-01-22 22:12:32 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 22:12:32 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2011-01-22 22:12:32 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 22:12:38 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 22:12:38 - /usr/bin/c
On 1/22/11, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 23 January 2011 01:11, b. f. wrote:
>
>> Would you look to see if any of your improvements can also be used by
>> uath(4)?
>
> Nope, sorry. I can only do two things at a time. :)
I didn't mean immediately, but at some point in the not-too-distant
future. Or
Hi all,
I've just committed a new tool in src/tools/tools/ath/ called ath_prom_dump .
It dumps the contents of the atheros EEPROM into a text file for later analysis.
I don't have any AR9285's handy; if you have an AR9285, would you
please send me a hexdump of the EEPROM along with the contents
On 23 January 2011 07:47, b. f. wrote:
>> Nope, sorry. I can only do two things at a time. :)
>
> I didn't mean immediately, but at some point in the not-too-distant
> future. Or do you lack the hardware, if not the time?
All of the above, sorry.
The atheros wifi hacking is mostly a spare-time
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:33:21 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:33:21 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for sparc64/sparc64
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:33:21 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:33:30 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:33:30 - /usr
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:07:31 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:07:31 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:07:31 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:07:38 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:07:38 - /usr
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:56:19 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:56:19 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for sparc64/sun4v
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:56:19 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:56:27 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:56:27 - /usr/b
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:29:29 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:29:29 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc64/powerpc
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:29:29 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:29:39 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-22 23:29:39 - /u
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:00 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/pc98
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:01 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:09 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:09 - /usr/bin/c
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:00 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/i386
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:01 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:09 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:09 - /usr/bin/c
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:57:23 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:57:23 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:57:23 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:57:30 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:57:30 - /usr/bin/c
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:00 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for amd64/amd64
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:01 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:12 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-23 01:05:12 - /usr/bin
Adrian Chadd wrote:
> I haven't changed anything on the AR9285 codebase that would account
> for the above.
That maybe. The visible difference in behaviour is that when there's
no traffic, the reported rate drops to 1Mbps. As soon as there's
traffic it jumps to 54Mbps.
> Something to keep in mi
Make sure you're absolutely, positively not doing power saving stuff.
I'm quite certain the ar5416+ HAL is just not doing the right thing
re: power saving mode.
Adrian
On 23 January 2011 13:55, Ian FREISLICH wrote:
> Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> I haven't changed anything on the AR9285 codebase that
34 matches
Mail list logo
