Hi!
On 10/01/11 05:22, rellis wrote:
> If you google for 'linux wireless automated testbed' you'll find a plethora
> of entries. It seems to be a research topic at a number of universities.
Yes, but I highly doubt any of these can be talked into giving their
stuff away to something that does n
The plastic router cloud! Way awesome!
I know building stuff is big fun, but before anyone gets her/his soldier
iron out, this could maybe be tried with an emulator? Shouldn't there be
a gazillion emulators out there for the obscurest architectures? I
recall having seen ARM ones even in the debian
Nice!
Thank you Bastian!
Please be aware that
* I haven't tested the USB-to-serial HW that I had suggested with Linux.
I do not own one of those, but I believe they work out of the box.
* As you may know I am no frequent committer to OpenWRT nor lurker on
the ML, you probably know better than me
Applied. Thanks!
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 11:54 AM, John Clark wrote:
> Roback, Joe schrieb:
>
>> I would agree, lately, I am seeing a bunch of these in my logs:
>>
>>ath: Failed to stop TX DMA in 100 msec after killing last frame
>>>
>>
>> but my 802.11n 40MHz performance has been the best its been in 6 months
Roback, Joe schrieb:
I would agree, lately, I am seeing a bunch of these in my logs:
ath: Failed to stop TX DMA in 100 msec after killing last frame
but my 802.11n 40MHz performance has been the best its been in 6
months ;-)
On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 16:35:10 -0600, "J. Ryan Earl"
wrote:
On 12/01/11 13:43, David Goodenough wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 January 2011, Peter Lebbing wrote:
>> On 12/01/11 13:19, David Goodenough wrote:
>>> Given that they are do different, perhaps your driver should be named
>>> as the adm6996m.c rather than just adm6996.c, and then we can have
>>> an adm69
On Wednesday 12 January 2011, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 12/01/11 13:19, David Goodenough wrote:
> > The odd thing is that the current code (before your patch) detects my
> > ADM6996FC. It does not do much with it, but it detects it.
>
> That is very odd indeed. I did not change the detection. Are
Previously hostapd created one control interface /var/run/hostapd-phyX
which only contained the first virtual bssid (for example wlan0). In
order to access the other virtual bssids with hostapd_cli add all
virtual bssids to /var/run/hostapd-phyX by specifying the ctrl_interface
parameter per bssid.
On 12/01/11 13:19, David Goodenough wrote:
> The odd thing is that the current code (before your patch) detects my
> ADM6996FC. It does not do much with it, but it detects it.
That is very odd indeed. I did not change the detection. Are you sure it is my
patch that changes the behaviour, and not
On Wednesday 12 January 2011, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 11/01/11 14:30, David Goodenough wrote:
> > OK, so does your code check to see if this is an M, or do we need to add
> > that? Do you think we should have two different drivers, one for the M
> > the other for the F and L, or can we interweave
On 11/01/11 14:30, David Goodenough wrote:
> OK, so does your code check to see if this is an M, or do we need to add that?
> Do you think we should have two different drivers, one for the M the other for
> the F and L, or can we interweave the code?
The detection and initialization part of the dr
12 matches
Mail list logo
