Michael Buesch wrote:
>
> We are talking about the "mac_suspend in pwork" patch, which got
> commented to death by you and several others.
> But there is no way around applying it.
> There are only two choices. Either we apply that patch and make
> further development (and bugfixing) of bcm43xx possible, or we
> drop everything.
>
> This patch is not in John's main branches, because people did not
> want to have it (for whatever obscure reasons...). In fact, it
> _was_ there, until John rebased his repository to get it out again.
> I think it's partially applied to wireless-2.6#bcm43xx.
>
> So, can we finally have your ACK and get that patch upstream again?
>
> I think this is the patch in question:
> https://bat.berlios.de/pipermail/bcm43xx-dev/2006-June/001925.html
>
> I completely lost track of which bugfix is finally in which tree,
> because of all this useless trouble. I think the init-rewrite patch
> didn't get applied, too (because it depends on the above).
>
With the exception of the last hunk in the patch to
drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c, all of those changes are
already in Linville's tree. A patch for the missing hunk, generated against the
current tree, is as follows:
index 24d531e..628e5fe 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_main.c
@@ -3962,6 +3962,7 @@ static int bcm43xx_init_private(struct b
bcm->softmac->set_channel = bcm43xx_ieee80211_set_chan;
bcm->irq_savedstate = BCM43xx_IRQ_INITIAL;
+ bcm->mac_suspended = 1;
bcm->pci_dev = pci_dev;
bcm->net_dev = net_dev;
bcm->bad_frames_preempt = modparam_bad_frames_preempt;
Larry
_______________________________________________
Bcm43xx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://bat.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev
