Hi Stefan, I’ve tried with Arch Linux bootable USB image. Below is the trimmed dmesg output containing "iwlwifi".
[ 10.780644] iwlwifi 0000:00:14.3: Direct firmware load for iwlwifi-QuZ-a0-jf-b0-64.ucode failed with error -2 [ 11.208185] iwlwifi 0000:00:14.3: api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver [ 11.208200] iwlwifi 0000:00:14.3: TLV_FW_FSEQ_VERSION: FSEQ Version: 89.3.35.37 [ 11.208394] iwlwifi 0000:00:14.3: loaded firmware version 63.c04f3485.0 QuZ-a0-jf-b0-63.ucode op_mode iwlmvm [ 11.600912] iwlwifi 0000:00:14.3: Detected Intel(R) Wireless-AC 9560 160MHz, REV=0x354 [ 11.727984] iwlwifi 0000:00:14.3: Detected RF JF, rfid=0x105110 [ 11.801329] iwlwifi 0000:00:14.3: base HW address: 50:e0:85:74:ca:f2 For your convenience, you find full dmesg[1] and lspci[2] output from these links. 1. https://0bin.net/paste/eYczF21o#kR0a9A1-kvX3RDKItcMYzsAxUfxzKVsc44oWD+axvsE 2. https://0bin.net/paste/5dUHu16e#DFnVFOvRoyfuEGCEN6z8woMm4QCuP+-7FKR1oj7pWKx Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, Sardor On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 5:44 PM Stefan Sperling <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 03:57:53PM +0900, Sardor Muminov wrote: > > Hello developers, > > > > I own one of the Thinkpad X1 Carbon Gen 7 series laptops. > > I have installed OpenBSD 7.0 and couldn't get the wireless connection to > > work. > > > > Below is a link to the dmesg[1] and pcidump[2] output. > > > > 1. > > > https://0bin.net/paste/pNBrVw-L#7eWENjA8U41mikVDnCgUsJensq+mWbRzpOuEtLD8usQ > > 2. > > > https://0bin.net/paste/BCS7i7tw#-T5l1bFgNh3Q6eOb6R5sSOi57bEpFralPd5v/Hv1vdF > > > > I have checked Joshua's blog post, but it seems I have a newer version of > > the WiFi chipset (Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201). > > > > Is there any possibility for me to get this issue resolved? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > Sardor > > > > Can you please boot linux on this machine and tell me which firmware file > the linux iwlwifi driver is loading? In theory it is possible to figure > it out by reading the linux driver. In practice Intel's device matching > code is complicated to follow because they have workarounds layered on > top of more workarounds. The best I could do is make a blind guess, and > such guessing could needlessy waste some of your time and my time. > Thanks. >
