> I'd like to write/release a bunch of testing tools to let the open
> community do this themselves, but the worry is that the FCC will get
> angry.
>
Let them get angry, the HAMs will police there own.
Jerry, KD4YAL
___
ath9k-devel mailing list
at
ath_complete_reset will not be called if ath9k_hw_reset
is unsuccessful, so we need to re-enable intertupts to
balence the previous ath_prepare_reset call. Also schedule a
reset as a best effort method to recover the chip from
whatever state caused the channel change failure.
Fixes https://bugzil
On 2 April 2013 16:05, Jerald A DeLong wrote:
>
>> I'd like to write/release a bunch of testing tools to let the open
>> community do this themselves, but the worry is that the FCC will get
>> angry.
>>
>
> Let them get angry, the HAMs will police there own.
As I've said many times before, it's n
On 2 April 2013 11:15, John Clark wrote:
> In the US there is a similar amateur band at 2.39 GHz. (It was 2.3-2.4, but
> commercial interests 'bought' the 2.31 to 2.39 chunk...). I don't believe
> there a 10 MHz BW limit, but the QSL.NET site gives 20, 10, and 5 MHz band
> frequency centers...
On Apr 2, 2013, at 6:04 AM, Holger Schurig wrote:
> > Felix and I are looking into opening this up for the 11n chips.
> > There are some interesting FCC implications by doing this, just so you know.
>
> Adrian, open it just for ham radio amateurs. We are allowed (here in Germany,
> at least) to
On Apr 2, 2013, at 9:43 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Adrian Chadd wrote:
FCC implications
>>>
>>> I don't see how Qualcomm can be held liable for what users do.
>>
>> The FCC isn't that clear-cut. From what I've been told, they don't
>> give you explicit rules to meet, they give you guidelines
Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Yes, the FCC will chase after people who make/sell devices that are
> in violation of licencing requirements.
That's a problem of course. :(
> Eg, continuous abuse by people who are disabling DFS on DFS
> requiring channels, then deciding to operate near airports.
Abuse su
Yes, the FCC will chase after people who make/sell devices that are in
violation of licencing requirements. Eg, continuous abuse by people
who are disabling DFS on DFS requiring channels, then deciding to
operate near airports.
It's not as clear-cut as you're making it out, Peter. Please accept
th
The point behind GPIO pins is that they're generic. There's a
multiplexer in the NIC which lets you map various GPIO pins to any
internal function.
So, you need to find which GPIO pins the bluetooth device is connected to.
Once you know that, you can set the GPIO input/output multiplexer bits
to
Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >> FCC implications
> >
> > I don't see how Qualcomm can be held liable for what users do.
>
> The FCC isn't that clear-cut. From what I've been told, they don't
> give you explicit rules to meet, they give you guidelines, and tell
> you when you're doing things that they fin
please delet list email
___
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
Hello Mr.Adrian,
The card manufacturer like Compex systems for AR9287 has these pins
available on PCIe interface. But my query is AR9287 specific. AR9287 is a 76
pin IC. GPIO4 is Pin22, GPIO5 is Pin23, GPIO6 is Pin 24 and so on. The question
is if I need to access COEX signals (WL_ACTIVE, BT
We're all happy to answer technical questions about what's going on
behind the scenes here, at least to some degree.
The AR9285/AR9485 diversity config is a little difficult to wrap your
head around first if you've grown up in MIMO 11n NICs, but it's not
that scary.
The problem though is:
* Is i
On 2 April 2013 06:04, Holger Schurig wrote:
>> Felix and I are looking into opening this up for the 11n chips.
>> There are some interesting FCC implications by doing this, just so you
>> know.
>
> Adrian, open it just for ham radio amateurs. We are allowed (here in
> Germany, at least) to use up
On 2 April 2013 06:51, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> FCC implications
>
> I don't see how Qualcomm can be held liable for what users do.
>
> If that is likely to actually happen, that suggests to me that users
> are not actually legal entities responsible for their actions. I'd be
>
It depends on what the card manufacturer has done.
Adrian
On 2 April 2013 04:57, sandeep suresh wrote:
> Hello All,
> In AR9287, there are ten GPIOs and GPIO[0:3] are mapped to JTAG.
> Remaining GPIOs [4:9] are free. Can you please help me with the mapping of
> GPIO pins to COEX pins?
Adrian Chadd wrote:
> FCC implications
I don't see how Qualcomm can be held liable for what users do.
If that is likely to actually happen, that suggests to me that users
are not actually legal entities responsible for their actions. I'd be
surprised if that's the case.
//Peter
Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c
b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c
index 07e2526..76da544 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c
+++ b/dr
> Felix and I are looking into opening this up for the 11n chips.
> There are some interesting FCC implications by doing this, just so you
know.
Adrian, open it just for ham radio amateurs. We are allowed (here in
Germany, at least) to use up to 75 W PEP tx power on 2.3 GHz and 5.7 GHz,
unfortunat
> Doesn't look like anyone is in a hurry to fix it. Say I wanted to take a
stab at submitting a patch, any resources you'd
> recommend? My C/C++ experience is mainly limited to college, I program in
Java during the day. These books look interesting:
I don't really know those books, but "Linux Devi
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
> Your patch is badly whitespace damaged.
Ouch, must be the gmail web client. I'll resubmit a fixed one.
> Why the call to ath9k_hw_set_interrupts here?
Simply because that's what ath_complete_reset does
_
Dear Andres,
Adrian preliminary confirmed it is possible to get CSI out of hardware. He
helped me to send an internal request to Atheros to assist on the issue. We
sent the request 30 of March.
I am not clear what to do next and I am waiting directions from Adrian at
the moment.
I think that it
On 2013-04-02 2:03 PM, Robert Shade wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> Your patch is badly whitespace damaged.
>
> Ouch, must be the gmail web client. I'll resubmit a fixed one.
>
>> Why the call to ath9k_hw_set_interrupts here?
>
> Simply because that's what ath_
Hello All,
In AR9287, there are ten GPIOs and GPIO[0:3] are mapped to JTAG.
Remaining GPIOs [4:9] are free. Can you please help me with the mapping of GPIO
pins to COEX pins? That means which GPIO is connected to:
a) WLAN_ACTIVE
b)BT_PRIORITY
c)BT_ACTIVE
d)BT_FREQUENCY
Thanks & regards
Hi Adrian, Nikolay,
any luck on this line? I am also interested in obtained CSI information
from hw for research purposes.
Thanks!
Andrés
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Nikolay Makarov wrote:
> Thank you very much Adrian. I would appreciate your help.
>
> С уважением,
> Николай Макаров
> +7
25 matches
Mail list logo
