On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 03:33:23PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Dec 2005, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
> Following the hints at
> https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/bcm43xx-dev/2005-October/000305.html,
> I extracted the necessary offsets from the driver file. The iv offset
> I simply guess
Hello all !
First of all, congratulations for your huge work, it is working more
than fine.
I just wanted to know if someone already implemented the master mode,
and if the WDS features could be used ? In latest broadcom binaries, you
can use the multi-bssid feature, could it be supporte too
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 19:05:22 +0100
stefan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi...
>
> I just found your site and saw that you would need support to test the
> drivers...
>
> i have a notebook with:
> BCM4318 [AirForce One 54g]
>
> (not functioning by now)
>
> are there any tests or informations i
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 22:56:15 +0100
"S. Lazaro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, somebody run's Belkin F5D7010 54g Wireless Network card ?
> it's WPA support? My card break off the machine with actual driver/firm
Please be more specific.
--
ciao
st3
__
Hi,
I have a BCM4319 in my DELL Latitude D610
notebook.
Do you plan to add support for this chipset in your
driver? If you need any additional informations i'll try to help you, just tell
me how.
Best regards,
Pawel Bojarski
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Olivier BARTHELEMY wrote:
> Here is what lspci gives me for my broadcom 4318 chip in my acer
> aspire 5024 notebook.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ lspci -vvd :4318
> :06:05.0 Network controller: Broadcom Corporation: Unknown device
> 4318 (rev 02)
> Subsystem: AMBIT Microsystem Corp.: Unkno
Hello,
unfortunately I can't compile the softmac to test the driver. This is
what happens:
---snip---
make -C /lib/modules/2.6.14.3-default/build
M=/home/chewie/tessun/no_backup/CVS/svn/bcm43xx/ieee80211softmac-20051215
modules
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/tessun/kernel/linux-2.6.14.3
Hello,
unfortunately I can't compile the softmac to test the driver. This is
what happens:
---snip---
make -C /lib/modules/2.6.14.3-default/build
M=/home/chewie/tessun/no_backup/CVS/svn/bcm43xx/ieee80211softmac-20051215
modules
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/tessun/kernel/linux-2.6.14.3
Alle 20:27, giovedì 15 dicembre 2005, Thomas Kaufmann ha scritto:
> Kismet works. Because bcm43xx is not included, I used this source :
> source=hostap,wlan0,addme
> Like that I can use Kismet with my BCM4306 (rev 03). Monitor mode is
> supported.
> Happy Scanning ...
If you use stable version, yo
Harald Welte wrote:
I also think that there is a lack of knowledge on the architecture of
802.11 low-level protocols and drivers among many people (including
myself) in the network community. Only this way I can explain why there
are always people who claim that the kernel already has a 802.11
'
Hi,
first a huge thanks for all of your work!
I'm trying bcm43xx on my powerbook6,2 12"
bcm43xx revision 836
softmac changeset 188
kernel 2.6.15-rc5 vanilla
wireless-tools 28pre11
softmac and bcm43xx seems to load ok:
[ 444.049082] ieee80211_crypt: registered algorithm 'NULL'
[ 444.064319] ie
On Monday 05 December 2005 14:31, Jiri Benc wrote:
> > And Joseph &
> > friends are writing a module to support softmac cards in that framework,
> > which is one of the most urgently needed things right now, because all
> > the existing softmac frameworks don't work with that code.
>
> And authors
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 02:05:07PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Harald Welte wrote:
> >I also think that there is a lack of knowledge on the architecture of
> >802.11 low-level protocols and drivers among many people (including
> >myself) in the network community. Only this way I can explain why th
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:12:44 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> this argument is analogue to the adaptec SAS driver one about the scsi
> host structure. ieee80211 should be a LIBRARY of functions that can do
> things,
Unfortunately, it is not possible to implement ieee80211 as a library,
because you
> 3. Most of WE calls can be handled by ieee80211 itself. The rest should
> be propagated to a driver in some easier way than requiring driver to
> deal with the whole WE stuff itself. Also, exporting callbacks from
> ieee80211 that driver has to set as particular WE handlers seems to be
> unneces
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 14:34:22 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> I agree with you, and that is exactly what we are doing:
> We take the existing code and add functionality to it. If the
> added functionality is an external module, well, consinder this
> as an extra cookie for devices which do not need MA
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 14:08:28 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Unfortunately, the only long-term solution is to rewrite completely the
> > current in-kernel ieee80211 code (I would not call it a "stack") or
> > replace it with something another. The current code was written for
> > Intel devices and it
Hi, I am a PowerBook owner who wishes I could run Linux on my PowerBook.
I was elated to hear today that you were increasingly successful in
reverse-enngineering the Broadcom 43xx spec. I noticed on your website
that you were looking for test equipment; if you would find an Airport
Extreme card (li
Michael Wu wrote:
The softmac code that is still in adm8211 is actually based on an early
version of the softmac code that Jouni made for Devicescape. The Devicescape
code does much more useful stuff than the code currently in the kernel. Sure,
I can and have been porting adm8211 to the new ker
Hi!
> > Please stop beeing a freaking jackass. There are various projects using
> > the current code. It's not perfect but people are working on it.
>
> Yes, and everyone implements his own softmac (this is the third one I
> know about). I tried to put all of these efforts together (google
> th
David S. Miller wrote:
I'm at the point where I frankly don't care which softmac
implementation we go with, but rather I'm more concerned that we pick
_ONE_ and just stick with it, and then adding the necessary interfaces
and infrastructure as different wireless devices require.
Yes, you hear me
I get those XMIT errors after the calc_nrssi_slope in periodic_work1.
Yesterday, mb__ found a bug in those function (wrong radio_write offsets), but
even if now it's fixed, I get the error. I have only tried scanning, and
works. Maybe something wrong in the specs ?
[ 5546.438429] bcm43xx driver
From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 20:40:47 +0530
> I'm also in favor of merging the devicescape code, but I don't see it
> happening without somebody taking care to provide all the required
> levels of interfaces (I see at least three levels of API's that a wireless
> dr
Which 802.11a BCM43xx based cards would you prefer?
What brands/models will you need inorder to improve/complete the BCM43xx
drivers?
Regards,
Alex
___
Bcm43xx-dev mailing list
Bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de
http://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/b
On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 21:23:42 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> This is __not__ "yet another stack". It is an _extension_.
> It is all about management frames, which the in-kernel code
> does not manage.
But this code should be part of the stack, as nearly every driver needs
it. Management handling sho
Hi...
I just found your site and saw that you would need support to test the
drivers...
i have a notebook with:
BCM4318 [AirForce One 54g]
(not functioning by now)
are there any tests or informations i can provide you with?!
thx
Stefan Esterer
--
--http://www.what2do.at--
__
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 02:53:29PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > ieee80211 is used by Intel. Some bits used by HostAP, which also
> > duplicates a lot of ieee80211 code. And bcm43xx. And another couple
> > drivers found in -mm or out-of-tree.
>
> Orinoco also uses it now no ?
Dave, the Ori
On Mon, 5 Dec 2005, Johannes Berg wrote:
> While a lot of work remains to be done (mostly on the softmac, read on),
> a bunch of people are actually using the driver under linux now to get
> access to the internet. So here's the official announcement:
>
> http://bcm-specs.sipsolutions.net/announce
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 04:26:50AM -0500, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Dec 05, 2005, at 15:42, Jiri Benc wrote:
> >On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 21:23:42 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> >>This is __not__ "yet another stack". It is an _extension_. It is
> >>all about management frames, which the in-kernel code d
Hi!
> I am a developer of the Broadcom-43xx driver project.
> (The 43xx chipset is used in a lot of chipsets, including
> the Apple Airport 2 card).
>
> I am writing this mail on my PowerBook and it is sent
> wireless to my AP.
> That means, we can transmit real data, if you did not get it,
> yet
Hi.
On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 13:46 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Although I'm a bit biased towards MadWifi, I'd second your suggestion to
> > make use of the Devicescape code. The benefit of having a fully-blown
> > 802.11 stack in the kernel that drivers can make use of has been
> > discussed before
This is my fault, either pull from my repo[1], or wait until johill
applies the fix.
Sorry about this,
-Joe
[1] old-http://dev.gentoo.org/~josejx/softmac
___
Bcm43xx-dev mailing list
Bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de
http://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinf
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 01:52:21PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> In general, Jouni's points are good, as are Michael's.
>
> The key question is about the size of the SoftMAC code. If its huge, an
> ieee80211 sub-module makes sense. If it's not, then adding the code to
> net/ieee80211 makes a lot
On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 21:35 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > BCM43xx driver:
> > > > http://bcm43xx.berlios.de
> > > > Required SoftMAC Layer:
> > > > http://softmac.sipsolutions.net
> > >
> > > ...but don't feel like playing with *two* different revision control
> > > systems just to g
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 02:08:28PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Jiri Benc wrote:
> >On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:38:37 -0500, Joseph Jezak wrote:
> >
> >>We're not writing an entire stack. We're writing a layer that sits in
> >>between the current ieee80211 stack that's already present in the kerne
Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 02:08:28PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Jiri Benc wrote:
> >On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:38:37 -0500, Joseph Jezak wrote:
> >
> >>We're not writing an entire stack. We're writing a layer that sits in
> >>between the current ieee80211 stack that's already
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 07:55:43PM +0100, Jiri Benc wrote:
> Unfortunately, the only long-term solution is to rewrite completely the
> current in-kernel ieee80211 code (I would not call it a "stack") or
> replace it with something another. The current code was written for
> Intel devices and it doe
Hi!
> > > BCM43xx driver:
> > > http://bcm43xx.berlios.de
> > > Required SoftMAC Layer:
> > > http://softmac.sipsolutions.net
> >
> > ...but don't feel like playing with *two* different revision control
> > systems just to get the sources. Do you think you could just mail the
> > diffs to the lis
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 08:31:21PM +0100, Jiri Benc wrote:
> > And Joseph &
> > friends are writing a module to support softmac cards in that framework,
> > which is one of the most urgently needed things right now, because all the
> > existing softmac frameworks don't work with that code.
>
> And
On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 19:10:08 +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Please stop beeing a freaking jackass. There are various projects using
> the current code. It's not perfect but people are working on it.
Yes, and everyone implements his own softmac (this is the third one I
know about). I tried to p
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 03:28:32PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> Well, I do not care for drivers ignoring SoftMAC and duplicating
> the work. The question is: Why don't these drivers use SoftMAC?
> (Yeah, because it is incomplete, is the answer. :D I am talking
> about future.)
For me, the answe
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 14:08:28 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Patently false.
>
> ieee80211 is used by Intel. Some bits used by HostAP, which also
> duplicates a lot of ieee80211 code. And bcm43xx. And another couple
> drivers found in -mm or out-of-tree.
Hostap uses only encryption code, which w
Hi.
On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 19:00 +0100, Jiri Benc wrote:
> Why yet another attempt to write 802.11 stack? Sure, the one currently
> in the kernel is unusable and everybody knows about it. But why not to
> improve code opensourced by Devicescape some time ago instead of
> inventing the wheel again a
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:38:37 -0500, Joseph Jezak wrote:
> We're not writing an entire stack. We're writing a layer that sits in
> between the current ieee80211 stack that's already present in the kernel
> and drivers that do not have a hardware MAC. Since ieee80211 is already
> in use in the k
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:54:00 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Complete bullshit. There is obviously 802.11 generic code in the
> kernel, and that's what _I_ am saying, because it's true.
>
> If it doesn't support your favorite wireless chipset, then submit patches.
I have no favorite chipset. I read
Jiri Benc wrote:
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:38:37 -0500, Joseph Jezak wrote:
We're not writing an entire stack. We're writing a layer that sits in
between the current ieee80211 stack that's already present in the kernel
and drivers that do not have a hardware MAC. Since ieee80211 is already
in
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:46:43 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Use the stack that's already in the kernel.
>
> Encouraging otherwise hinders continued wireless progress under Linux.
There is nothing like a "802.11 stack" currently in the kernel,
regardless what James Ketrenos is saying. Sorry.
--
Ji
Jiri Benc wrote:
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:46:43 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Use the stack that's already in the kernel.
Encouraging otherwise hinders continued wireless progress under Linux.
There is nothing like a "802.11 stack" currently in the kernel,
regardless what James Ketrenos is saying
In general, Jouni's points are good, as are Michael's.
The key question is about the size of the SoftMAC code. If its huge, an
ieee80211 sub-module makes sense. If it's not, then adding the code to
net/ieee80211 makes a lot more sense.
Certainly some chips will use more ieee80211 code than
Michael Renzmann wrote:
Hi.
On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 19:00 +0100, Jiri Benc wrote:
Why yet another attempt to write 802.11 stack? Sure, the one currently
in the kernel is unusable and everybody knows about it. But why not to
improve code opensourced by Devicescape some time ago instead of
inventi
On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 19:50:08 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The team is in the progress of writing a SoftwareMAC layer,
> which is needed for the bcm device. The SoftMAC is still very
> incomplete. So do not expect to do any fancy stuff like WPA
> or something line that with it.
Why yet another
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 12:08:16PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> The SoftMAC is a separate module. That is _good_, so devices like
> the ipw do not have to load the code, because they do not need it.
> The SoftMAC ties (and integrates) very close to the ieee80211 subsystem.
I like the modular de
On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 08:58:30PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > Why not use the new in-kernel wifi stack?
>
> We do. The SoftMAC is an extension to it.
> SoftMAC = Software Medium Access Control. It is about sending
> and receiving management frames.
> Some chips do this in hardware, so it i
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 22:58:25 +0100
Stefano Brivio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your subsystem may be different. Me too, I got a BCM4318, but there are
> different subsystems. Check the top of _main.c. I'm going to add Olivier's
> subsystem as well.
Oops. It has been added by Martin 23 hours ago.
Hi, somebody run's Belkin F5D7010 54g Wireless Network card ?
it's WPA support? My card break off the machine with actual driver/firm
___
Bcm43xx-dev mailing list
Bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de
http://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev
Hi,
I ported the bcm43xx driver (http://bcm43xx.berlios.de) to the
devicescape ieee802.11 stack.
This port is a project branch, so softmac is still supported
and developed.
bcm43xx now supports software-side encryption functionality.
(The hardware supports encryption, but that's not completely
im
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 21:35:04 +0100
Lorenzo Milesi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Here is what lspci gives me for my broadcom 4318 chip in
> > my acer aspire 5024 notebook.
>
> 00:09.0 Network controller: Broadcom Corporation BCM4318 [AirForce One
> 54g] 802.11g Wireless LAN Controller (rev 02)
>
Hi.
You need the devicescape stack and utils from here :
http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/jbenc/
I used also the devicescape patch from this list and the
dscape branch of the driver itselfe.
cu
Edgar
Patrick Dolan wrote:
Are you using wpa_supplicant with this driver then?
What dri
Din't test WEP. I only use WPA here.
cu
Edgar
Michael Tautschnig wrote:
I can't believe what i saw today. WPA on the
Airport Extreme card in my 15" Powerbook.
Great Job.
Does WEP work as well? I thought encryption isn't supported yet!?
Thanks,
Michael
_
> Here is what lspci gives me for my broadcom 4318 chip in
> my acer aspire 5024 notebook.
00:09.0 Network controller: Broadcom Corporation BCM4318 [AirForce One
54g] 802.11g Wireless LAN Controller (rev 02)
ginger maxxer # lspci -n |grep 09.0
00:09.0 0280: 14e4:4318 (rev 02)
It's supported, I t
Are you using wpa_supplicant with this driver then?
What driver do you pass to wpa_supplicant with the -D
switch? Or is it done differently?
Thanks.
--- Michael Buesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 December 2005 20:51, Michael
> Tautschnig wrote:
> > > I can't believe what i saw tod
On Tuesday 20 December 2005 20:51, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> > I can't believe what i saw today. WPA on the
> > Airport Extreme card in my 15" Powerbook.
> > Great Job.
> >
>
> Does WEP work as well? I thought encryption isn't supported yet!?
Should do, with the devicescape stack. But
I did not
On Monday 19 December 2005 08:44, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
> I've noticed that when I take my (iBook G4 "early 2004") laptop to sleep
> while it was using the bcm43xx wireless, and then wake it up, X is garbled
> and I can't seem to run any commands, so I have to force-reboot the
> machine.
I just
> I can't believe what i saw today. WPA on the
> Airport Extreme card in my 15" Powerbook.
> Great Job.
>
Does WEP work as well? I thought encryption isn't supported yet!?
Thanks,
Michael
___
Bcm43xx-dev mailing list
Bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de
http:/
I can't believe what i saw today. WPA on the
Airport Extreme card in my 15" Powerbook.
Great Job.
cu
Edgar Hucek
___
Bcm43xx-dev mailing list
Bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de
http://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev
On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 19:19 -0600, Juan Pablo Mendoza wrote:
> The bcm43xx driver works great _until_ the AP goes away (said, I
> disconnect it, I move out of it's range or I change the WEP key). Then
> the whole pbook freezes, i can't do anything with it anymore, not even
> connect through the net
Here is what lspci gives me for my broadcom 4318 chip in
my acer aspire 5024 notebook.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ lspci -vvd :4318
:06:05.0 Network controller: Broadcom Corporation:
Unknown device 4318 (rev 02)
Subsystem: AMBIT Microsystem Corp.: Unknown
device 0311
Control: I/O-
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 13:08 +0100, Tim ter Laak wrote:
>
> > I know the MAC address is in the database, because I can connect to it
> > with ndiswrapper. When I set the essid GUEST (after doing ifconfig eth1
> > up), my syslog shows a scan is initiated,
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 13:08 +0100, Tim ter Laak wrote:
> I know the MAC address is in the database, because I can connect to it
> with ndiswrapper. When I set the essid GUEST (after doing ifconfig eth1
> up), my syslog shows a scan is initiated, but apparently it cannot find
> that network:
There
Hello,
I'm trying to get this driver working on my uni's wireless network, which
has 2 modes of operation, each with their own SSID:
- Using encryption with authentication. I know encryption isn't suported yet.
- Using MAC-address filtering. This one doesn't broadcast its SSID ("GUEST").
I know t
70 matches
Mail list logo
