Return-path: Received: from tex.lwn.net ([70.33.254.29]:46500 "EHLO vena.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754515Ab3EFP3M (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2013 11:29:12 -0400 Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 09:29:10 -0600 From: Jake Edge To: Johannes Berg Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, lkml , Stanislaw Gruszka Subject: Re: Bisected 3.9 regression for iwl4965 connection problem to 1672c0e3 Message-ID: <20130506092910.080f96cd@chukar.edge2.net> (sfid-20130506_172941_036969_272BB6FD) In-Reply-To: <1367853859.8434.11.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> References: <20130505143803.7e46e4c6@chukar.edge2.net> <1367853112.8434.6.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <20130506092143.58a7713f@chukar.edge2.net> <1367853859.8434.11.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 06 May 2013 17:24:19 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 09:21 -0600, Jake Edge wrote: > > > > Thanks for the report. Is the AP on a passive channel by any > > > chance (5 GHz, or channels 12/13)? > > > > No, from what I can see on my router, it is using channel 36 (5.180 > > GHz) for the SSID in question > > So yes, that is a passive channel for the 4965 device :-) oops, sorry :) (obviously I don't know what a passive channel is :) > > but Stanislaw seems to have pinpointed the issue. > > Yeah that was a workaround, but I'm not sure we'd really want to do > that. I'd rather see what really caused this issue. I have a feeling > it's the passive-no-RX workaround, or lack thereof maybe? I need to > look a bit closer. Ok, I'm happy to test things out at this end ... change channels on the router, build new kernels, etc. thanks, jake -- Jake Edge - LWN - jake@lwn.net - http://lwn.net