Message-ID: <4FAAB0FE.601@broadcom.com> (sfid-20120509_200201_882591_9FB5A317)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 20:01:34 +0200
From: "Arend van Spriel" <arend@broadcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Seth Forshee" <seth.forshee@canonical.com>
cc: "Jonathan Nieder" <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
	=?UTF-8?B?Q2FtYWxlw7Nu?= <noelamac@gmail.com>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"sgruszka@redhat.com" <sgruszka@redhat.com>,
	"Johannes Berg" <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: brcmsmac still woes, possible regression?
References: <20120328112657.GA6114@stt008.linux.site>
 <4F7302D9.8070009@broadcom.com>
 <CAKprTDHz0d=W1472KcHuD-Zda9dCUX+5nKfEX55UfiNBeQ7T2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F744DD8.8010004@broadcom.com>
 <20120329133835.GA5196@stt008.linux.site>
 <CAKprTDFxqYq7jMm3z19xEt4NBeN9FbcR0pez9BSjY6R8kZC5KA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20120402215005.GA13969@burratino> <4F7B179F.7070502@broadcom.com>
 <20120509094111.GA2333@burratino> <4FAA45AF.8050201@broadcom.com>
 <20120509174106.GA7189@ubuntu-mba>
In-Reply-To: <20120509174106.GA7189@ubuntu-mba>
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On 05/09/2012 07:41 PM, Seth Forshee wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 12:23:43PM +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote:
>> On 05/09/2012 11:41 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>> Hi Arend,
>>>
>>> Arend van Spriel wrote, about a month ago[1]:
>>>
>>>> I sent the patch to Camaleón to test it before sending out the
>>>> patch. So the answer it definitely no. I wanted to get it into rc1,
>>>> but we missed that.
>>>
>>> Any news?  If there's a patch that goes in the right direction with
>>> known problems I'd still be interested in it, among other reasons
>>> because it would make the bug more concrete and make it easier to
>>> think about possible fixes.
>>
>> Well, there is the short term fix, which is already upstream and moved
>> to stable. The long term fix for which Seth Forshee (Canonical) did a
>> great job is reviewed over here, but it involves regulatory related code
>> so it needs discussions with our compliance team and supervisor. So that
>> causes some lag time.
> 
> The patches I sent still relies on the transmit-after-beacon fix, as I
> preserved the behavior of muting tx if the channel is passive scan. I
> *think* this isn't actually necessary, but I'd have to investigate a
> little further to be certain.
> 
> Seth
> 

As part of the discussion over here I am proposing to get rid of the tx
muting in brcmsmac as mac80211 already has that behaviour for passive
channels if I am not mistaken (is this true, Johannes?).

Gr. AvS