Return-path: Received: from bu3sch.de ([62.75.166.246]:56080 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752378AbYI3N2s (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:28:48 -0400 From: Michael Buesch To: bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de Subject: Re: [RFC/T] b43: to few loop tries in do_dummy_tx Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:28:26 +0200 Cc: Peter Stuge , wireless References: <48E11F1E.50705@lwfinger.net> <48E14879.4050300@lwfinger.net> <20080930055034.16412.qmail@stuge.se> In-Reply-To: <20080930055034.16412.qmail@stuge.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200809301528.26304.mb@bu3sch.de> (sfid-20080930_152851_904460_4FDF0D8A) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tuesday 30 September 2008 07:50:34 Peter Stuge wrote: > Larry Finger wrote: > > > Which specs? > > > > The ones generated by the reverse engineers. See > > http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/. > > Nice work, but as it's a spec of another driver implementation rather > than hardware (or even the firmware API) I don't think it should be > so authoritative. If other values are clearly better why not use > them? What crap are you smoking? The b43 and b43-legacy driver are _based_ on these specifications. There are no other specs available. -- Greetings Michael.