This card has the "xjack" antennae which is supposed to disable the radio (I
thought it was in hardware, but it's not) when it is not extended. The
madwifi driver (Last time I actually used this card with it) did disable the
radio (Or refused packets, not sure which).
The kernel ath5k driver (last tested 2.6.29.4) will work regardless if the
antannae is in or out.
[CCed ath5k-devel]
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 3:51 PM, William
Thompson<[email protected]> wrote:
> This card has the "xjack" antennae which is supposed to disable the radio (I
> thought it was in hardware, but it's not) when it is not extended. ?The
> madwifi driver (Last time I actually used this card with it) did disable the
> radio (Or refused packets, not sure which).
Huh, I wonder how that works. Is disabling the radio an advertised feature?
i.e. as opposed to just not working because the antenna is in?
> The kernel ath5k driver (last tested 2.6.29.4) will work regardless if the
> antannae is in or out.
I suppose it could be asserting something on rfkill gpios; ath5k hasn't had
real rfkill support yet. Anyone else know about these devices?
--
Bob Copeland %% http://www.bobcopeland.com
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 04:39:12PM -0400, Bob Copeland wrote:
> [CCed ath5k-devel]
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 3:51 PM, William
> Thompson<[email protected]> wrote:
> > This card has the "xjack" antennae which is supposed to disable the radio (I
> > thought it was in hardware, but it's not) when it is not extended. ?The
> > madwifi driver (Last time I actually used this card with it) did disable the
> > radio (Or refused packets, not sure which).
>
> Huh, I wonder how that works. Is disabling the radio an advertised feature?
> i.e. as opposed to just not working because the antenna is in?
I'm not sure if it was advertised that way, but according to 3com's site:
3Com-patented XJACK antenna design extends for use and retracts for safe
transport and to conserve power; no need to remove the PC Card from the
notebook while traveling
Sounds like it was intended that way.
> > The kernel ath5k driver (last tested 2.6.29.4) will work regardless if the
> > antannae is in or out.
>
> I suppose it could be asserting something on rfkill gpios; ath5k hasn't had
> real rfkill support yet. Anyone else know about these devices?
It's possible. The LED on it goes off when it's pushed in. Which reminds
me, I don't think the ath5k driver allows the LED to blink when it's
transmitting/receiving, it just stays on.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 07:23:57AM -0400, William Thompson wrote:
> > I suppose it could be asserting something on rfkill gpios; ath5k hasn't had
> > real rfkill support yet. Anyone else know about these devices?
>
> It's possible. The LED on it goes off when it's pushed in. Which reminds
> me, I don't think the ath5k driver allows the LED to blink when it's
> transmitting/receiving, it just stays on.
Can you try latest wireless-testing? There's an rfkill patch for
ath5k in it. URL is:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-testing.git
As for LEDs, there's a patch in kernel bugzilla. I don't have a link handy
but you can check the ath5k-devel archives from a week or two ago, let
me know if you can't find it.
--
Bob Copeland %% http://www.bobcopeland.com
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 07:34:06AM -0400, Bob Copeland wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 07:23:57AM -0400, William Thompson wrote:
> > > I suppose it could be asserting something on rfkill gpios; ath5k hasn't had
> > > real rfkill support yet. Anyone else know about these devices?
> >
> > It's possible. The LED on it goes off when it's pushed in. Which reminds
> > me, I don't think the ath5k driver allows the LED to blink when it's
> > transmitting/receiving, it just stays on.
>
> Can you try latest wireless-testing? There's an rfkill patch for
> ath5k in it. URL is:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-testing.git
Unfortunately, I don't know how to use git.
> As for LEDs, there's a patch in kernel bugzilla. I don't have a link handy
> but you can check the ath5k-devel archives from a week or two ago, let
> me know if you can't find it.
I'll see.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 07:54:32AM -0400, William Thompson wrote:
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-testing.git
>
> Unfortunately, I don't know how to use git.
Quite easy for this purpose:
$ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-testing.git
The patch can also be found in the mailing list archives, but it won't apply
to 2.6.30.
--
Bob Copeland %% http://www.bobcopeland.com
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 08:07:36AM -0400, Bob Copeland wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 07:54:32AM -0400, William Thompson wrote:
> > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-testing.git
> >
> > Unfortunately, I don't know how to use git.
>
> Quite easy for this purpose:
>
> $ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-testing.git
>
> The patch can also be found in the mailing list archives, but it won't apply
> to 2.6.30.
That's huge! Isn't there an easier way to do it?
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:25 AM, William
Thompson<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 08:07:36AM -0400, Bob Copeland wrote:
>> $ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-testing.git
>>
>
> That's huge! ?Isn't there an easier way to do it?
Unfortunately, it depends on surrounding rfkill framework that hit the tree
after 2.6.30. Now that compat-wireless builds, you can try it, but since it
is a backport, YMMV.
--
Bob Copeland %% http://www.bobcopeland.com
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 01:41:30PM -0400, Bob Copeland wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:25 AM, William
> Thompson<[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 08:07:36AM -0400, Bob Copeland wrote:
> >> $ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-testing.git
> >>
> >
> > That's huge! ?Isn't there an easier way to do it?
>
> Unfortunately, it depends on surrounding rfkill framework that hit the tree
> after 2.6.30. Now that compat-wireless builds, you can try it, but since it
> is a backport, YMMV.
Isn't there an easy way to obtain the patch? THe clone has completed but I
don't have a clue what to do.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:33 PM, William
Thompson<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Isn't there an easy way to obtain the patch? ?THe clone has completed but I
> don't have a clue what to do.
Just build the kernel from the resulting tree, it already has the changes
included.
As I said, the patch won't do any good because it needs the new rfkill
infrastructure. That is why I also suggested compat-wireless which is just
the wireless code that you can build like out-of-tree modules, but it contains
all the infrastructure (http://linuxwireless.org/download/compat-wireless-2.6/).
--
Bob Copeland %% http://www.bobcopeland.com