Return-path: Received: from mail-ig0-f173.google.com ([209.85.213.173]:36933 "EHLO mail-ig0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752050AbcCJOlV (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Mar 2016 09:41:21 -0500 Received: by mail-ig0-f173.google.com with SMTP id z8so19670668ige.0 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2016 06:41:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56E08615.9060208@lwfinger.net> References: <56E08615.9060208@lwfinger.net> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 15:41:19 +0100 Message-ID: (sfid-20160310_154127_300533_0E1631C3) Subject: Re: New firmware for RT2870 From: Helmut Schaa To: Larry Finger Cc: linux-wireless , Stanislaw Gruszka , dan.g.tob@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Larry Finger wrote: > In https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114151, the OP reports > improved stability and performance for an RT5370 using a newer firmware that > came with the driver CD. The logs show this to be version 0.36, whereas the > version now in linux-firmware is version 0.29. > > I downloaded the firmware from b.k.o. It had very little effect on my > no-name adapter with ID 148f:3070. It still gets ping losses of 10-15%. > > Should this new version be submitted to linux-firmware? Its provenance seems > to be sketchy, but submission would likely be legal. Version 0.36 can also be found in the vendor tarball on [1] even though it references a different chip ... So, in my opinion this should be safe from a legal point of view. Helmut [1] http://www.mediatek.com/en/downloads1/downloads/mt7612u/