What's the FCC rules for 5.8ghz atm?
adrian
On 4 June 2013 21:41, Josef Semler josef.sem...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Adrian,
I've done a modification for 5.8 ghz and some outdoor tests usin
ubnt-hardware.
Joe
Am Mittwoch, 5. Juni 2013 schrieb Adrian Chadd :
Hi all,
I'm hacking at the
Do nothing know about FCC. As I know ist open in us without tech.
Regulations like dfs or tpc. (No disturbance of radar devices in this area)
In Europe (like Austria) the channel 149-165 are used for comm. services
acc the srd-specification but are NOT ism and has to be coordinated by the
local
Do you know this document of FCC?
It describes all about the actual situation in us.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-13-22A1.pdf
Joe
Am Mittwoch, 5. Juni 2013 schrieb Adrian Chadd :
What's the FCC rules for 5.8ghz atm?
adrian
On 4 June 2013 21:41, Josef Semler
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Oleksij Rempel li...@rempel-privat.de wrote:
This error seems to be really rare, and we do not know real couse of it.
But, in any case, we should check size of head before reducing it.
We had a similar issue in rt2x00 quite some time ago.
In general
Hi:
I installed hostpad-1.0 and do make
I got an compile error as following:
../src/crypto/tls_openssl.c:23:25: fatal error: openssl/ssl.h: No such file
or directory
compilation terminated.
Could you find me a solution ?Thanks
Sincerely
Angela
___
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Oleksij Rempel li...@rempel-privat.de wrote:
This error seems to be really rare, and we do not know real couse of it.
But, in any case, we should check size of head before reducing it.
Mind to try the (completely untested) patch against wireless-testing instead?
On 06/05/2013 04:24 PM, Helmut Schaa wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Oleksij Rempel li...@rempel-privat.de wrote:
This error seems to be really rare, and we do not know real couse of it.
But, in any case, we should check size of head before reducing it.
Mind to try the (completely
Am 05.06.2013 16:26, schrieb Marc Kleine-Budde:
On 06/05/2013 04:24 PM, Helmut Schaa wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Oleksij Rempel li...@rempel-privat.de
wrote:
This error seems to be really rare, and we do not know real couse of it.
But, in any case, we should check size of head
Am 05.06.2013 16:46, schrieb Oleksij Rempel:
Am 05.06.2013 16:26, schrieb Marc Kleine-Budde:
On 06/05/2013 04:24 PM, Helmut Schaa wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Oleksij Rempel
li...@rempel-privat.de wrote:
This error seems to be really rare, and we do not know real couse of
it.
But,
I reset my router to the default netgear firmware and found the issue
still continues.
After seeing this message board post :
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=137643
I set an option for ath9k_htc to nohwcrypt=1. I will see how it goes
in terms of stability. In addition, I was wondering
On 06/05/2013 02:11 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
(cc'ing wireless crowd, tglx and Ingo. The original thread is at
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1500158/focus=55005 )
Hello, Ben.
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 01:58:31PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
Hmm, wonder if I found it. I previously saw
(cc'ing wireless crowd, tglx and Ingo. The original thread is at
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1500158/focus=55005 )
Hello, Ben.
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 01:58:31PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
Hmm, wonder if I found it. I previously saw times where it appears
jiffies does not
We tried changing backoff value range through this function in mac.c
REG_WRITE(ah, AR_DLCL_IFS(q),
SM(cwMin, AR_D_LCL_IFS_CWMIN) |
SM(qi-tqi_cwmax, AR_D_LCL_IFS_CWMAX) |
SM(qi-tqi_aifs, AR_D_LCL_IFS_AIFS));
Setting using 1,1 in place of cwMin and qi-tqi_cwmax respectively is giving
almost the
How are you testing?
adrian
On 5 June 2013 18:01, Ruwaifa Anwar ruwaifa.an...@gmail.com wrote:
We tried changing backoff value range through this function in mac.c
REG_WRITE(ah, AR_DLCL_IFS(q),
SM(cwMin, AR_D_LCL_IFS_CWMIN) |
SM(qi-tqi_cwmax, AR_D_LCL_IFS_CWMAX) |
SM(qi-tqi_aifs,
Ruwaifa Anwar ruwaifa.anwar at gmail.com writes:
We tried changing backoff value range through this function in mac.c
REG_WRITE(ah, AR_DLCL_IFS(q),
SM(cwMin, AR_D_LCL_IFS_CWMIN) |
SM(qi-tqi_cwmax, AR_D_LCL_IFS_CWMAX) |
SM(qi-tqi_aifs, AR_D_LCL_IFS_AIFS));
Setting using 1,1 in place of
Well, backoff is only going to increment if it fails, so if you have a
mostly clear air, you're not going to see many failures.
Do the math and see if you're already filling the air with transmissions.
Try setting it max,max instead of min,min and see what happens.
The backoff counter is reset
First, NOOO!!
Second, will you still be given datasheets on new wireless chips to
enable support? Or will you at least be able to encourage Atheros to
release the datasheets? Tell them I bought Atheros because of you!
On 6/3/2013 2:17 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Hi
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 14:11 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
(cc'ing wireless crowd, tglx and Ingo. The original thread is at
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1500158/focus=55005 )
Hello, Ben.
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 01:58:31PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
Hmm, wonder if I found it. I
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 20:14 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
Ah, so, that's why it's showing up now. We probably have had the same
issue all along but it used to be masked by the softirq limiting. Do
you care to revive the 10 iterations limit so that it's limited by
both the count and timing? We
On 06/05/2013 08:26 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 20:14 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
Ah, so, that's why it's showing up now. We probably have had the same
issue all along but it used to be masked by the softirq limiting. Do
you care to revive the 10 iterations limit so that it's
Hello, Eric.
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 06:34:52PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
Ingo, Thomas, we're seeing a stop_machine hanging because
* All other CPUs entered IRQ disabled stage. Jiffies is not being
updated.
* The last CPU get caught up executing softirq indefinitely. As
On 06/05/2013 08:46 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 20:41 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
On 06/05/2013 08:26 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 20:14 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
Ah, so, that's why it's showing up now. We probably have had the same
issue all along but it used
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 20:50 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
On 06/05/2013 08:46 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
We use in Google a patch triggering warning is a thread holds the cpu
without taking care to need_resched() for more than xx ms
Well, I'm sure that patch works nicely until the clock stops
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 20:41 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
On 06/05/2013 08:26 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 20:14 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
Ah, so, that's why it's showing up now. We probably have had the same
issue all along but it used to be masked by the softirq limiting.
24 matches
Mail list logo
