Return-path: Received: from crystal.sipsolutions.net ([195.210.38.204]:40685 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755362AbYDMIHj (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Apr 2008 04:07:39 -0400 Subject: Re: RaLink RT2500 802.11g Cardbus/mini-PCI From: Johannes Berg To: Thomas =?ISO-8859-1?Q?B=E4chler?= Cc: Ivo van Doorn , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, "John W. Linville" , Vladimir Koutny In-Reply-To: <1208072495.4111.10.camel@johannes.berg> (sfid-20080413_084148_084338_B7DE3981) References: <35856.201.36.161.238.1206999707.squirrel@mamao.cetuc.puc-rio.br> <200804021932.26046.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <47FE8FAD.9020802@archlinux.org> <200804121246.44236.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <4800F76C.7000801@archlinux.org> (sfid-20080412_185459_927704_9BFD3D28) <1208072495.4111.10.camel@johannes.berg> (sfid-20080413_084148_084338_B7DE3981) Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-6+fVytmX8rlV69qd8JKa" Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:07:29 +0200 Message-Id: <1208074049.4111.18.camel@johannes.berg> (sfid-20080413_090757_131055_65BB9A71) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-6+fVytmX8rlV69qd8JKa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > I compiled half a dozen kernels and now figured it out. This is the=20 > > patch that causes rt2500pci to be slow. If I revert it, it is fast agai= n: > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=3Dlinux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=3D= commitdiff;h=3Dd43c7b37ad787173d08683f05eadeea0398fefdf > That's odd. But that patch looks a bit fishy now that I look at it, care > to try below change (manually, this isn't a patch)? >=20 > johannes >=20 > bool use_protection =3D (erp_value & WLAN_ERP_USE_PROTECTION) != =3D 0; > - bool use_short_preamble =3D (erp_value & WLAN_ERP_BARKER_PREAMBLE= ) =3D=3D 0; > =EF=BB=BF=EF=BB=BF+ bool use_short_preamble =3D (erp_value & WLAN_E= RP_BARKER_PREAMBLE) !=3D 0; > DECLARE_MAC_BUF(mac); No, wait, I'm confused, the original patch is correct. As far as I can tell, the code there is correct. The bug in that code was actually introduced by me based on the wrong thinking I just did again. johannes --=-6+fVytmX8rlV69qd8JKa Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Johannes Berg (powerbook) iQIVAwUASAG/QKVg1VMiehFYAQJLoA/+InCvtovQzkcTJP1Jw3kQcqB1BKaxBpWc pyBQcD1CxSF+XLkpypNUIagOlVji2odcEs0+dKheYBPND67nu8qjhga2xUb8ZRmJ oth46ynkONPoiChb7ahfMAtFgyIG5fFZNoL4vRL2tGfFyYvjLdjnheExRb3mzh5s 5sdWAoY63Rdqhs8SfcDtm4VFFl5hd2qQj6ZTncVcT37wfAiEKQfV6pUKuP/0+KjU GaFAp7duzVjIjTshzj9UZeE5TEkZF2bCJmmP1ppujY/UnV9RFsRYusk9V+LuKtjk pI2L2IUooatBqX9PqMlkCNTnZjSC7XZZhnu9hBiIrRacfhvKUxiCdJn00I76r5CH uVIQRM4mkNeS9QmV+Pe5SzedJ8hjSZck3HHwxDUY7WYF4h2VdrMzFW+hJnwWL83u +K2Lni0NeMEaWCX3EasHKUgJWymZtTMaWsHVa+fyUv/VOGY0v0kpguad4h4kCfB7 SEFoo0k33ikxdIsPylv4w2UfjcAw4fD0ePpeLFXSWeZyJ2KVaUuq+3rACIiFjeda llbeR12AMciK6Kk+5c+AFSRk0OlG5G2imbxJhwUPj5jp7zHKadzTHcPkqoeceRIh +ZZgcqup9cnY9h0fHtw/XXkSAD6UsFpJ2zVvq7p72XMfqMFm80Tyeu/jk+zHr2eW Dq4SO3GcNW4= =J5LE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-6+fVytmX8rlV69qd8JKa--