From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20110421/004124.html | 121 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 121 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20110421/004124.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20110421/004124.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20110421/004124.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20110421/004124.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..953523dfb --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20110421/004124.html @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] kernel problem with wifi rfkill? + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] kernel problem with wifi rfkill?

+ Colin Guthrie + mageia at colin.guthr.ie +
+ Thu Apr 21 12:32:22 CEST 2011 +

+
+ +
'Twas brillig, and Thomas Backlund at 21/04/11 11:07 did gyre and gimble:
+>> iwlagn          : Intel Corporation|PRO/Wireless 4965 AG or AGN [Kedron]
+>> Network Connection [NETWORK_OTHER] (vendor:8086 device:4229 subv:8086
+>> subd:1101) (rev: 61)
+>>
+> 
+> I have this same, I'll test tonight/tomorrow...
+
+Thanks.
+
+>>
+>> I found this which seems like a likely candidate for a fix...
+>> http://ns.spinics.net/lists/linux-wireless/msg64176.html
+>>
+>> but it's from February... is it really not in the .38.x kernel yet??
+> 
+> That patch got merged in 2.6.38-rc1, so it is there.
+
+I've been looking through the various commits:
+
+http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.38.y.git;a=commitdiff;h=3dd823e6b86407aed1a025041d8f1df77e43a9c8
+
+http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.38.y.git;a=commitdiff;h=554d1d027b19265c4aa3f718b3126d2b86e09a08
+
+http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.38.y.git;a=commitdiff;h=6cd0b1cb872b3bf9fc5de4536404206ab74bafdd
+
+
+What is odd about the 3dd8 commit (i.e. the fix I mentioned in the first
+mail) is there is code that says:
+
+        if (test_bit(STATUS_INT_ENABLED, &priv->status))
+                iwl_enable_interrupts(priv);
+
+I presume test_bit returns "true" if the bit is set? If so, then the
+call, is a little strange as iwl_enable_interrupts sets the bit again.
+
+So it's only enabled if it's already set? Perhaps test_bit returns 0
+when it's already set?
+
+172 static inline void iwl_enable_interrupts(struct iwl_priv *priv)
+173 {
+174         IWL_DEBUG_ISR(priv, "Enabling interrupts\n");
+175         set_bit(STATUS_INT_ENABLED, &priv->status);
+176         iwl_write32(priv, CSR_INT_MASK, priv->inta_mask);
+177 }
+
+
+But I'm no kernel hacker, so all this could be rubbish.
+
+Col
+
+
+
+-- 
+
+Colin Guthrie
+mageia(at)colin.guthr.ie
+http://colin.guthr.ie/
+
+Day Job:
+  Tribalogic Limited [http://www.tribalogic.net/]
+Open Source:
+  Mageia Contributor [http://www.mageia.org/]
+  PulseAudio Hacker [http://www.pulseaudio.org/]
+  Trac Hacker [http://trac.edgewall.org/]
+
+ + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1