>>Hi,
>>
>>I'm seeing this in ubuntu 9.04 (kernel 2.6.28). It shows more or less
>> the same figures we have in FBSD.
>
> Try older versions, 8.X perhaps.
>
Hi,
I-m writing from a live ubuntu 8.04 right now. At work I have a Cisco
Aironet 1200 (nice AP) and moving my dell latitude D
On 5/3/09, Gustau Perez wrote:
>
>> That information is misleading, I remmember reading somewhere that linux
>> rt73
>> had similar problems like rum but it got fixed, and is not present in
>> new kernels.
>> I think that problem originated for linux from now obsolete drivers.
>>
>> On what linux
That information is misleading, I remmember reading somewhere that linux rt73
had similar problems like rum but it got fixed, and is not present in
new kernels.
I think that problem originated for linux from now obsolete drivers.
On what linux version and what drivers version do you experience
On 5/2/09, Gustau Perez wrote:
>
>>> Any idea if is there anything to change/tune ?
>>>
>>
>> There is not just bbp17 to tune there are probably others much more
>> important
>> registers.
>>
>> But as I already mentioned that code is completly missing.
>>
>>
>I was not talking about autotun
Any idea if is there anything to change/tune ?
There is not just bbp17 to tune there are probably others much more important
registers.
But as I already mentioned that code is completly missing.
I was not talking about autotuning features, which are missing as you
pointed. Was t
On 5/1/09, Gustau Perez wrote:
>
>> There is several places where bbp17 is changed.
>>
>>
>
>Editing the code looking for calls to the function rum_bbp_write,
> I've been able to find where bbp17 is changed at init. Changing
> rum_def_bbp[3] (which is reg 17) to values quite 'big' like 0x10 or
There is several places where bbp17 is changed.
Editing the code looking for calls to the function rum_bbp_write,
I've been able to find where bbp17 is changed at init. Changing
rum_def_bbp[3] (which is reg 17) to values quite 'big' like 0x10 or 0x14
doesn't seem to affect its behaviou
On 5/1/09, Gustau Perez wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think this is right place to post, if it is not, please let me know.
>
>I'm experiencing problems with two different devices using if_rum.
> One is a Hercules Guillemot and the other is a Linksys Cisco WUSB54GC
>
> The first one is about sensi
Hi,
I think this is right place to post, if it is not, please let me know.
I'm experiencing problems with two different devices using if_rum.
One is a Hercules Guillemot and the other is a Linksys Cisco WUSB54GC
The first one is about sensitivity, which is very low: for example,
I'm detec
