i don't know what's different between stable/11 and -head. I'd
appreciate some help in figuring /that/ out...
-a
On 12 August 2016 at 15:53, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 03:44:43PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Heh, ok. So undo the #if 0 and let's
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 03:44:43PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Heh, ok. So undo the #if 0 and let's just see if it crashes or not.
> ...
Well, as things presently stand, I can't use wlan0 at work except in
head (which I haven't hacked, and I am running now).
If I boot stable/11, I can only
Heh, ok. So undo the #if 0 and let's just see if it crashes or not.
-adrian
On 12 August 2016 at 15:13, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 02:37:44PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Just #if 0 that whole chunk out and see if that improves wireless at
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 02:37:44PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi
>
> Just #if 0 that whole chunk out and see if that improves wireless at work?
>
That didn't seem to change the behavior in any observable way.
So I tried booting stable/10... which wouldn't even associate.
As I type, I'm
Hi
Just #if 0 that whole chunk out and see if that improves wireless at work?
-a
On 12 August 2016 at 14:18, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:40:03AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> EIther stable/11 or head. Both are fine.
>>
>>
>>
>> -a
>>
>>
>> On 12
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:40:03AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> EIther stable/11 or head. Both are fine.
>
>
>
> -a
>
>
> On 12 August 2016 at 11:05, David Wolfskill wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:01:25AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >> David,
> >>
> >> Totally
EIther stable/11 or head. Both are fine.
-a
On 12 August 2016 at 11:05, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:01:25AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> David,
>>
>> Totally untested; will need manual application as I bet this patch is
>> mangled.
>>
>> Would
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:01:25AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> David,
>
> Totally untested; will need manual application as I bet this patch is mangled.
>
> Would you mind testing this? I have a feeling we need to add if_addr
> lock calls in a few places.
Sure; I'll test. Which branch?
David,
Totally untested; will need manual application as I bet this patch is mangled.
Would you mind testing this? I have a feeling we need to add if_addr
lock calls in a few places.
Thanks,
-adrian
Index: sys/net80211/ieee80211_ioctl.c
[snip]
#define IF_LLADDR(ifp) \
LLADDR((struct sockaddr_dl *)((ifp)->if_addr->ifa_addr))
it's because if_addr is NULL in your dump. God knows why that is! My
guess is we caught it in some stupid update window.
Ok, so what should we do for
10 matches
Mail list logo