lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: bcm43xx regression in 2.6.24 (with patch)
    Date
    On Saturday 23 February 2008 22:32:46 Alexey Zaytsev wrote:
    > > The insults being? A few quotes, please.
    > If you really want to know, the
    > "Because the new driver works, if you just set it up right."
    > for me was clearly a hint that I'm just an other imcompetent
    > user, who can't even follow the instructions from linuxwireless.org.

    Well. That's 99% of all bugreports I receive. You will understand
    that I won't explain the same crap that's written on linuxwireless.org
    over and over 20 times each day to random people.
    And yes, you belong to the group of my "random people", as I don't
    remember your name from the top of my head.
    So in 99% of the cases the user did something wrong.

    But I still don't see the insult.

    > And you knew that the new driver did no work with the bcm4311
    > chips, which is the sad thing.

    That is not true. It doesn't work with exactly _one_ revision
    of the bcm4311 card. And that is already fixed in 2.6.25.
    I'd like to have that in .24-stable, too, but I guess it's too big.
    It changes some parts of the DMA engine code.

    > Not true at all. I my first and second emails, there was not a single word
    > about who broke the driver. There were only the fix, and the explanation,
    > why the fix is needed. I really appreciate the work done on the b43 driver,
    > and I'd emmediately switch to it, if only it worked for me*.

    Yeah. But I don't like that patch. Then people came and said stuff like
    I _have_ to accept it because it fixes stuff I broke. Excuse me, but
    nobody can force me to sign off a patch that I am not completely
    convinced of. _Even_ if it turns out that a commit made by me
    broke something. Especially, if there's already another fix for the
    situation queued up in the development kernel.

    > I'm the one person who investigated the problem, wrote a
    > patch and sent it to the lkml. After lurking in #bcm-users
    > for a day, I saw quite a few users asking why the b43 driver
    > did not work for them, and the best answer they got, was
    > got read the linuxwireless.org. Are you sure they all were
    > just unable to upgrade the firmware?

    Yeah. Experience shows that. Read the archives.

    > And by the way, the bcm4311 and b44 combination is not
    > something I assembled just to piss you off. It's what HP puts
    > in their HP Compaq nx7300 laptops. They were like the
    > cheapest Core Duo laptops a year ago, and I'm sure they were
    > not exclusively made.

    So be it. And you guess what? We already sent a fix for those
    people upstream a long time ago. It is in 2.6.25.

    > > So let's
    > > apply a questionable fix for it that we don't understand. Hopefully
    > > that fixes it and doesn't break it again for somebody else... .
    > >
    > > I provided an alternative fix. In my very first email.
    >
    > Sorry, your fix does not work for my hardware. And you know it.

    Did you _ever_ even try it?
    http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Download

    --
    Greetings Michael.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-02-23 23:25    [W:6.630 / U:0.160 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site