Return-path: Received: from purkki.adurom.net ([80.68.90.206]:46323 "EHLO purkki.adurom.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750840Ab1KYHAx convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Nov 2011 02:00:53 -0500 From: Kalle Valo To: Pedro Francisco Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: iwl3945 firmware errors: tentative debugging References: Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 09:00:45 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Pedro Francisco's message of "Thu, 24 Nov 2011 11:49:30 +0000") Message-ID: <87bos0hejm.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> (sfid-20111125_080057_181858_B803C4C1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Pedro Francisco writes: > iwl3945 has had firmware errors triggered 'by' NM after started using > nl80211 instead of wext. Since Intel has stopped supporting iwl3945, > no firmware fix has been possible. It has been workarounded by > disable_hw_scan=1 as default, with the penalty of network performance > being lower and frequent 'hangs' on the connection. > > I was able to trigger the firmware error by doing "iw dev wlan0 scan > passive". By comparison, "iw dev wlan0 scan" does NOT trigger the > firmware error. So NM uses passive scan? Now I'm curious, why is that? -- Kalle Valo