From: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: Larry Finger <larry.finger@lwfinger.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] bcm43xx-mac80211: Fix reported rx frequency and channel
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 19:36:40 +0200
Cc: Andy Green <andy@warmcat.com>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, johannes@sipsolutions.net
References: <20070611103828.961999956@warmcat.com> <46A0CB16.6010901@warmcat.com> <46A0E9B0.1050600@lwfinger.net>
In-Reply-To: <46A0E9B0.1050600@lwfinger.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-Id: <200707201936.41078.mb@bu3sch.de>
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Friday 20 July 2007 18:58:24 Larry Finger wrote:
> Andy Green wrote:
> > 
> > Understood, that is why I consider it a bad thing that functionality
> > that can be done in the mac80211 driver is pushed into the binary-only
> > firmware when there is a choice (otherwise known as "paranoia", apparently).
> 
> Unfortunately, that is a necessary result of this type of reverse-engineering. If Broadcom put some 
> function in the firmware, we have to leave it there as we have no idea what would break.
> 
> > However you stripped some quoting from Michael:
> > 
> > ''But it is actually no problem in reality, as the use-it-or-die
> > firmware doesn't have this problem. So if someone uses another
> > firmware than the one we suggest, he will probably run into more
> > problems, as well.
> > The fix is called: Use the correct firmware.
> > For now, at least.''
> > 
> > I would summarize this that Michael is telling me one pariticular
> > version of firmware - "use it or die firmware" - is especially
> > blessed/correct.  It might be an idea to let people know they have
> > strayed from the dependency of the required firmware version in dmesg if
> > indeed there is an effective dependency of the driver on it.
> 
> It isn't that it is blessed or correct, but that it has been tested. Your version has not. Who knows 
> what else might have changed? Once we know the version with the different behavior, a warning 
> message can be prepared. I don't think anyone knew about this problem until you submitted your patch.

People don't read dmesg. Adding a "This firmware is unsupported"
would have no effect.
I experience same thing for the "bcm43xx-does-not-support-v3-issue".
There is a clear error message saying what to do exactly. And _still_
people mail me asking what this message means.

The use-or-die firmware is here:
http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Drivers/bcm43xx

> > Can I still get the firmware version from fwcutter if I don't have the
> > original Windows binary the firmware came from?
> 
> AFAIK, fwcutter can only get the version from the foreign driver. It can be gotten from the dmesg 
> output of your inlaws computer, or if you have the extracted firmware files here, you can bundle 
> them up and email them to me privately.

People don't read dmesg.
q.e.d. ;)

-- 
Greetings Michael.