What about all of the custom BDF-s that were upstreamed primarly for
IPQ40XX and lately various QCA99XX and QCA98XX radios?
By disabling ath10k-firmware and using the linux-firmware version we are
bound to have to use ipq-wifi again since firmware and board files are
really rarely updated in linux-
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:25 AM Koen Vandeputte
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2018-10-03 20:06, Dirk Brenken wrote:
> > On Mi, 2018-10-03 at 17:59 +0200, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> >> On 2018-08-13 17:14, John Crispin wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont be a
On Do, 2018-10-04 at 11:25 +0200, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
>
> On 2018-10-03 20:06, Dirk Brenken wrote:
> > On Mi, 2018-10-03 at 17:59 +0200, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> > > On 2018-08-13 17:14, John Crispin wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont
On 2018-10-03 20:06, Dirk Brenken wrote:
On Mi, 2018-10-03 at 17:59 +0200, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
On 2018-08-13 17:14, John Crispin wrote:
Hi,
as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont be a
full
replacement for ar71xx by then we decided to bump ar71xx to v4.14.
This is avai
On Mi, 2018-10-03 at 17:59 +0200, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> On 2018-08-13 17:14, John Crispin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont be a
> > full
> > replacement for ar71xx by then we decided to bump ar71xx to v4.14.
> > This is available for testing i
On 2018-08-13 17:14, John Crispin wrote:
Hi,
as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont be a full
replacement for ar71xx by then we decided to bump ar71xx to v4.14.
This is available for testing inside my staging tree ->
https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/staging/blogic.gi
On 09/26/2018 12:01 AM, Daniel Golle wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:15:14PM +0200, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
>> ...
>> With that update I am fine with squashing the mac80211 updates and
>> pushing them to OpenWrt master.
>>
>> I checked the removed patches and could not find these two patches in
>
On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 17:24 +0200, John Crispin wrote:
>
> > We will have to send patches to linux-firmware to get them to
> > update
> > the files.
> >
> > John
>
> as a temp fix we need to revert
> e6bd568051c7ca77a59783fe50203f6e2a427f19
> right ?
>
> John
>
Sorry for top postin
On 26/09/2018 17:14, John Crispin wrote:
On 26/09/2018 17:12, Robert Marko wrote:
I understand the issues with never firmware breaking driver features,
and I dont have anything against using linux-firmware for the firmware
but board files there are too old.
For example board-2.bin for IPQ4019
On 26/09/2018 17:12, Robert Marko wrote:
I understand the issues with never firmware breaking driver features,
and I dont have anything against using linux-firmware for the firmware
but board files there are too old.
For example board-2.bin for IPQ4019 was last updated on 15.02.2018.
and it does
I understand the issues with never firmware breaking driver features,
and I dont have anything against using linux-firmware for the firmware
but board files there are too old.
For example board-2.bin for IPQ4019 was last updated on 15.02.2018.
and it does not contain any of the BDF that were upstre
On 26/09/2018 16:52, Robert Marko wrote:
What about all of the custom BDF-s that were upstreamed primarly for
IPQ40XX and lately various QCA99XX and QCA98XX radios?
By disabling ath10k-firmware and using the linux-firmware version we
are bound to have to use ipq-wifi again since firmware and bo
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:01:54AM +0200, Daniel Golle wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:15:14PM +0200, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> > ...
> > With that update I am fine with squashing the mac80211 updates and
> > pushing them to OpenWrt master.
> >
> > I checked the removed patches and could not fin
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:15:14PM +0200, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> ...
> With that update I am fine with squashing the mac80211 updates and
> pushing them to OpenWrt master.
>
> I checked the removed patches and could not find these two patches in
> the upstream kernel:
> *
> package/kernel/mac8021
On 09/24/2018 10:47 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> On 08/13/2018 05:14 PM, John Crispin wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont be a full
>> replacement for ar71xx by then we decided to bump ar71xx to v4.14. This
>> is available for testing inside my staging tre
On 08/13/2018 05:14 PM, John Crispin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont be a full
> replacement for ar71xx by then we decided to bump ar71xx to v4.14. This
> is available for testing inside my staging tree ->
>
> https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/staging
Hi John,
Thanks for the updates!
mac80211:
I've tested mac80211 on a large number of targets in the field:
- ~25 devices
- half of them having up to 4 wlan ifaces
- all running in IBSS
- Distance varying from 20m up to ~50km
For my cases, it seems to work well.
Small nit-pick:
In the bo
> > My Archer C7 v4 still bricks with the same error reported earlier and
> > confirmed by Koen: Atheros AR8216/AR8236/AR8316: probe of
> > ag71xx-mdio.0:00 failed with error -22
> >
>
> Hi All,
>
> I created a new branch in my staging tree, which is a replica of the
> latest master tree,
> but add
On 2018-08-23 19:00, Sven Schönhoff wrote:
curious what i missed as my archer-c7-v4 is working fine. TPLINK
AC1750 device
Hi,
please dont top post
I have no idea what you are asking.
Meaning I don't understand his issue mine works fine, so I'm curious as to
what's different
I would gues
> > > curious what i missed as my archer-c7-v4 is working fine. TPLINK
> > > AC1750 device
> > Hi,
> > please dont top post
> > I have no idea what you are asking.
> >
>
> Meaning I don't understand his issue mine works fine, so I'm curious as to
> what's different
I would guess you didn't cha
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018, 17:10 John Crispin wrote:
>
>
> On 22/08/18 12:02, Outback Dingo wrote:
> > curious what i missed as my archer-c7-v4 is working fine. TPLINK
> > AC1750 device
> Hi,
> please dont top post
> I have no idea what you are asking.
>
Meaning I don't understand his issue mine
On 2018-08-22 16:14, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
ar71xx:
I'm now currently testing your ar71xx 4.14 bump (comitted today in
master) on a few different targets:
- Gl-mifi
- Rocket-m5
- RB912
- RB2011
...
Will let you know the results.
Hi John,
I started with trying on a Mikrotik RB2011 as
ar71xx:
I'm now currently testing your ar71xx 4.14 bump (comitted today in
master) on a few different targets:
- Gl-mifi
- Rocket-m5
- RB912
- RB2011
...
Will let you know the results.
Hi John,
I started with trying on a Mikrotik RB2011 as these have a Serial port.
Ethernet does not fu
On 22/08/18 12:02, Outback Dingo wrote:
curious what i missed as my archer-c7-v4 is working fine. TPLINK
AC1750 device
Hi,
please dont top post
I have no idea what you are asking.
John
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openw
curious what i missed as my archer-c7-v4 is working fine. TPLINK
AC1750 device
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 11:59 AM Daniel Golle wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:43:18AM +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> > On 22/08/18 10:40, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> > > On 2018-08-13 17:14, John Crisp
Hi John,
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:43:18AM +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> On 22/08/18 10:40, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> > On 2018-08-13 17:14, John Crispin wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont be a
> > > full replacement for ar71xx by then we decid
On 22/08/18 10:40, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
On 2018-08-13 17:14, John Crispin wrote:
Hi,
as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont be a full
replacement for ar71xx by then we decided to bump ar71xx to v4.14.
This is available for testing inside my staging tree ->
https:/
On 2018-08-13 17:14, John Crispin wrote:
Hi,
as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont be a full
replacement for ar71xx by then we decided to bump ar71xx to v4.14.
This is available for testing inside my staging tree ->
https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/staging/blogic.gi
Why dropping 4.9 support right away?!? I've already tried 4.14 without
mac80211 update and got approximately 20Mbps less throughput on wifi than
with 4.9. If the 4.18 mac80211 update doesn't bring in some of the
peformance lost, I wouldn't even consider 4.14 kernel as a baseline for
anything.
On 1
Hi John,
I've tested your tree on my Archer C7 v4 but it bricked the device.
Only the power led is shining and I don't get a dhcp lease.
I've added the new "libubox: set RPATH for host build" commit to skip
the base-files error during build, added luci in make menuconfig and
unchecked "keep setti
Hi,
as 19.01 will probably use v4.14 as baseline and ath79 wont be a full
replacement for ar71xx by then we decided to bump ar71xx to v4.14. This
is available for testing inside my staging tree ->
https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/staging/blogic.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/staging
The tree
31 matches
Mail list logo
