* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken?
@ 2011-02-01 11:23 Dale Walsh
2011-02-01 12:51 ` Rafał Miłecki
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-01 11:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: b43-dev
I had a hard drive failure which forced me to perform a fresh/clean
installation of ubuntu 10 on a new drive since the old drive no
longer functions (it was rather old).
My use of the b43 software is only for modification of the PCI ID's
of the flashrom and the original installation was provided to me on
the HD.
Now I am unable to write the flashrom after the new installation it
always reports "write error: Operation Not Supported" and this is
using the same cards I was flashing before, I even tried using a
previously modified card and I get the same failure.
Since it worked before I can only conclude that the new software is
broken and the ability to write is a requirement, can someone help me
resolve this please.
-- Dale
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20110201/90d5750c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 188 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20110201/90d5750c/attachment.sig>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-01 11:23 unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-01 12:51 ` Rafał Miłecki 2011-02-01 12:57 ` Ehud Gavron 2011-02-01 16:28 ` Larry Finger 2 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Rafał Miłecki @ 2011-02-01 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev 2011/2/1 Dale Walsh <dale@daleenterprise.com>: > I had a hard drive failure which forced me to perform a fresh/clean > installation of ubuntu 10 on a new drive since the old drive no longer > functions (it was rather old). > My use of the b43 software is only for modification of the PCI ID's of the > flashrom and the original installation was provided to me on the HD. > Now I am unable to write the flashrom after the new installation it always > reports "write error: Operation Not Supported" and this is using the same > cards I was flashing before, I even tried using a?previously?modified card > and I get the same failure. > Since it worked before I can only conclude that the new software is broken > and the ability to write is a requirement, can someone help me resolve this > please. Do you mean ssb driver functionality? I remember Michael was fixing writing some time ago: commit e33761e6f23881de9f3ee77cc2204ab2e26f3d9a Author: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de> Date: Mon Nov 23 20:58:06 2009 +0100 ssb: Fix range check in sprom write The range check in the sprom image parser hex2sprom() is broken. One sprom word is 4 hex characters. This fixes the check and also adds much better sanity checks to the code. We better make sure the image is OK by doing some sanity checks to avoid bricking the device by accident. Signed-off-by: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de> Cc: stable at kernel.org Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> commit 3ba6018aa314559c5867138a8173b068268a70db Author: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de> Date: Mon Nov 23 20:12:13 2009 +0100 ssb: Fix SPROM writing The SPROM writing routines were broken since we rewrote the suspend handling on wireless devices, because SPROM writing depended on suspend. This patch changes it and freezes devices with the driver remove(), probe() callbacks instead. This also simplifies the whole logics a lot. Signed-off-by: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> Do you have that patches in your kernel? -- Rafa? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-01 11:23 unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? Dale Walsh 2011-02-01 12:51 ` Rafał Miłecki @ 2011-02-01 12:57 ` Ehud Gavron 2011-02-01 16:28 ` Larry Finger 2 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Ehud Gavron @ 2011-02-01 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On 02/01/2011 04:23 AM, Dale Walsh wrote: > I had a hard drive failure which forced me to perform a fresh/clean installation of ubuntu 10 on a new drive since the old drive > no longer functions (it was rather old). > > My use of the b43 software is only for modification of the PCI ID's of the flashrom and the original installation was provided to > me on the HD. > > Now I am unable to write the flashrom after the new installation it always reports "write error: Operation Not Supported" and this > is using the same cards I was flashing before, I even tried using a previously modified card and I get the same failure. > > Since it worked before I can only conclude that the new software is broken and the ability to write is a requirement, can someone > help me resolve this please. > > -- Dale > > Rafal covered some commits but I'm confused why you don't restore your backup and see why that works and your current system doesn't. Best regards, Ehud Gavron Tucson AZ US SOL3 > > > _______________________________________________ > b43-dev mailing list > b43-dev at lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/b43-dev -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20110201/e09c6b66/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ehudwetworkcontactqrcode.png Type: image/png Size: 1007 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20110201/e09c6b66/attachment.png> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-01 11:23 unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? Dale Walsh 2011-02-01 12:51 ` Rafał Miłecki 2011-02-01 12:57 ` Ehud Gavron @ 2011-02-01 16:28 ` Larry Finger 2011-02-02 7:50 ` Dale Walsh 2 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Larry Finger @ 2011-02-01 16:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On 02/01/2011 05:23 AM, Dale Walsh wrote: > I had a hard drive failure which forced me to perform a fresh/clean > installation of ubuntu 10 on a new drive since the old drive no longer > functions (it was rather old). > > My use of the b43 software is only for modification of the PCI ID's of > the flashrom and the original installation was provided to me on the HD. > > Now I am unable to write the flashrom after the new installation it > always reports "write error: Operation Not Supported" and this is using > the same cards I was flashing before, I even tried using > a previously modified card and I get the same failure. > > Since it worked before I can only conclude that the new software is > broken and the ability to write is a requirement, can someone help me > resolve this please. I do not doubt that the SPROM writing function is broken, but I wonder why you are needing it now. Why was it necessary to rewrite the SPROM in the first place? Once that was done, then it should never need to be done again. Please explain what you did and what you are doing now. Larry ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-01 16:28 ` Larry Finger @ 2011-02-02 7:50 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-03 3:27 ` Larry Finger 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-02 7:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On Feb 01, 2011, at 11:28 AM, Larry Finger wrote: > On 02/01/2011 05:23 AM, Dale Walsh wrote: >> I had a hard drive failure which forced me to perform a fresh/clean >> installation of ubuntu 10 on a new drive since the old drive no >> longer >> functions (it was rather old). >> >> My use of the b43 software is only for modification of the PCI >> ID's of >> the flashrom and the original installation was provided to me on >> the HD. >> >> Now I am unable to write the flashrom after the new installation it >> always reports "write error: Operation Not Supported" and this is >> using >> the same cards I was flashing before, I even tried using >> a previously modified card and I get the same failure. >> >> Since it worked before I can only conclude that the new software is >> broken and the ability to write is a requirement, can someone help me >> resolve this please. > > I do not doubt that the SPROM writing function is broken, but I > wonder why you > are needing it now. Why was it necessary to rewrite the SPROM in > the first > place? Once that was done, then it should never need to be done > again. Please > explain what you did and what you are doing now. Since not all cards are created equal I take a card with specific features and functionality, change the ID's to my own for use with my own custom drivers which provides added functionality for cards with my ID's. If the cards do not have my ID's they have the basic functionality that people are used to seeing, with my ID's they have the ability to run in simultaneous dual band mode (2.4ghz and 5ghz adhoc) and I use these ID's to ensure that the drivers only work on cards I approve. My only need for linux is to rebrand the cards with my ID's. If I understood enough about the write mechanism I would forego the b43 code all together and create an app that reads and writes the flashrom but the time involved in sifting through the ubuntu code due to it's source structure makes it a daunting task that turns me off. As before when working in the original installation (provided to me as a working installation) I would do the following: (both cat and cp fail) sudo su; # become root to avoid permission issues cd /PATH TO DIR OF ssb_sprom; # I verify ssb_sprom exists in this location rmmod b43; # unload the driver cat updated_sprom >ssb_sprom; # write the updated file This results in write failure under the new installation. cp updated_sprom >ssb_sprom This also results in a write failure under the new installation. > > Larry > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20110202/03c4f448/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 188 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20110202/03c4f448/attachment.sig> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-02 7:50 ` Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-03 3:27 ` Larry Finger 2011-02-03 11:49 ` Dale Walsh 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Larry Finger @ 2011-02-03 3:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On 02/02/2011 01:50 AM, Dale Walsh wrote: > On Feb 01, 2011, at 11:28 AM, Larry Finger wrote: > >> On 02/01/2011 05:23 AM, Dale Walsh wrote: >>> I had a hard drive failure which forced me to perform a fresh/clean >>> installation of ubuntu 10 on a new drive since the old drive no longer >>> functions (it was rather old). >>> >>> My use of the b43 software is only for modification of the PCI ID's of >>> the flashrom and the original installation was provided to me on the HD. >>> >>> Now I am unable to write the flashrom after the new installation it >>> always reports "write error: Operation Not Supported" and this is using >>> the same cards I was flashing before, I even tried using >>> a previously modified card and I get the same failure. >>> >>> Since it worked before I can only conclude that the new software is >>> broken and the ability to write is a requirement, can someone help me >>> resolve this please. >> >> I do not doubt that the SPROM writing function is broken, but I wonder >> why you >> are needing it now. Why was it necessary to rewrite the SPROM in the first >> place? Once that was done, then it should never need to be done again. >> Please >> explain what you did and what you are doing now. > > Since not all cards are created equal I take a card with specific > features and functionality, change the ID's to my own for use with my > own custom drivers which provides added functionality for cards with my > ID's. > > If the cards do not have my ID's they have the basic functionality that > people are used to seeing, with my ID's they have the ability to run > in simultaneous dual band mode (2.4ghz and 5ghz adhoc) and I use these > ID's to ensure that the drivers only work on cards I approve. > > My only need for linux is to rebrand the cards with my ID's. > > If I understood enough about the write mechanism I would forego the b43 > code all together and create an app that reads and writes the flashrom > but the time involved in sifting through the ubuntu code due to it's > source structure makes it a daunting task that turns me off. > > > As before when working in the original installation (provided to me as a > working installation) I would do the following: (both cat and cp fail) > > > sudo su; # become root to avoid permission issues > > cd /PATH TO DIR OF ssb_sprom; # I verify ssb_sprom exists in this location > > rmmod b43; # unload the driver > > cat updated_sprom >ssb_sprom; # write the updated file > > > This results in write failure under the new installation. > > > cp updated_sprom >ssb_sprom > > > This also results in a write failure under the new installation. I'm a little confused as the PCI IDs are not in the SPROM. Using the procedure you describe, you would be unable to change them. You say you use Ubuntu 10. Is it 10.04 or 10.10? The earlier one uses kernel 2.6.32, which I have not tested; however, I did try kernels 2.6.34 and 2.6.38. Both could write the SPROM for a Cardbus device without any problem. Larry ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 3:27 ` Larry Finger @ 2011-02-03 11:49 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-03 11:59 ` Michael Büsch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-03 11:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Feb 02, 2011, at 22:27 PM, Larry Finger wrote: > On 02/02/2011 01:50 AM, Dale Walsh wrote: >> On Feb 01, 2011, at 11:28 AM, Larry Finger wrote: >> >>> On 02/01/2011 05:23 AM, Dale Walsh wrote: >>>> I had a hard drive failure which forced me to perform a fresh/clean >>>> installation of ubuntu 10 on a new drive since the old drive no >>>> longer >>>> functions (it was rather old). >>>> >>>> My use of the b43 software is only for modification of the PCI >>>> ID's of >>>> the flashrom and the original installation was provided to me on >>>> the HD. >>>> >>>> Now I am unable to write the flashrom after the new installation it >>>> always reports "write error: Operation Not Supported" and this >>>> is using >>>> the same cards I was flashing before, I even tried using >>>> a previously modified card and I get the same failure. >>>> >>>> Since it worked before I can only conclude that the new software is >>>> broken and the ability to write is a requirement, can someone >>>> help me >>>> resolve this please. >>> >>> I do not doubt that the SPROM writing function is broken, but I >>> wonder >>> why you >>> are needing it now. Why was it necessary to rewrite the SPROM in >>> the first >>> place? Once that was done, then it should never need to be done >>> again. >>> Please >>> explain what you did and what you are doing now. >> >> Since not all cards are created equal I take a card with specific >> features and functionality, change the ID's to my own for use with my >> own custom drivers which provides added functionality for cards >> with my >> ID's. >> >> If the cards do not have my ID's they have the basic functionality >> that >> people are used to seeing, with my ID's they have the ability to run >> in simultaneous dual band mode (2.4ghz and 5ghz adhoc) and I use >> these >> ID's to ensure that the drivers only work on cards I approve. >> >> My only need for linux is to rebrand the cards with my ID's. >> >> If I understood enough about the write mechanism I would forego >> the b43 >> code all together and create an app that reads and writes the >> flashrom >> but the time involved in sifting through the ubuntu code due to it's >> source structure makes it a daunting task that turns me off. >> >> >> As before when working in the original installation (provided to >> me as a >> working installation) I would do the following: (both cat and cp >> fail) >> >> >> sudo su; # become root to avoid permission issues >> >> cd /PATH TO DIR OF ssb_sprom; # I verify ssb_sprom exists in this >> location >> >> rmmod b43; # unload the driver >> >> cat updated_sprom >ssb_sprom; # write the updated file >> >> >> This results in write failure under the new installation. >> >> >> cp updated_sprom >ssb_sprom >> >> >> This also results in a write failure under the new installation. > > I'm a little confused as the PCI IDs are not in the SPROM. Using > the procedure > you describe, you would be unable to change them. > > You say you use Ubuntu 10. Is it 10.04 or 10.10? The earlier one > uses kernel > 2.6.32, which I have not tested; however, I did try kernels 2.6.34 > and 2.6.38. > Both could write the SPROM for a Cardbus device without any problem. > > Larry Yes you must be confused since your making those claims. Perhaps you might wish to look at "ssb-sprom --help". All the information I can find about modifying the sprom data talk about using ssb-sprom to make the changes. The only thing that I have never been able to make work without corrupting the data is the status LED's, if I try to change them the card stop working and this test was performed on BCM94321 based cards and the test involved only changes to the status LED's so I have accepted that some changes are just not possible. Installed version is 10.04, a CD which was mailed to me by requesting it directly from ubuntu. What is frustrating me is that you are questioning my reasoning for requiring this functionality and making claims which you are apparently unknowledgeable about rather than focusing on the issue which is the failure to write. I'll download an image for 10.10 and try that, if it works I'll let you know. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFNSpZliD9DTPch4RQRAsI1AJ9SybdL8C9MYsNGXe3ROzbnHsgq4QCfXY3x ioSasOuRF2xx1LalBQdrv70= =+QjR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 11:49 ` Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-03 11:59 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-03 12:27 ` Dale Walsh 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-03 11:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 06:49 -0500, Dale Walsh wrote: > >>>> always reports "write error: Operation Not Supported" and this I don't see a codepath that could trigger -EOPNOTSUPP in the latest version of SSB. -- Greetings Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 11:59 ` Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-03 12:27 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-03 22:06 ` Michael Büsch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-03 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Feb 03, 2011, at 06:59 AM, Michael B?sch wrote: > On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 06:49 -0500, Dale Walsh wrote: >>>>>> always reports "write error: Operation Not Supported" and this > > I don't see a codepath that could trigger -EOPNOTSUPP in the > latest version of SSB. > > -- > Greetings Michael. Well something is causing the failure and if the ubuntu/linux code- base wasn't such a mess I'd go through and fix it myself. I installed ubuntu 10.10 and it works so there is something in the 10.04 CD ubuntu sent me that causes the failure so for future reference, you can tell them to upgrade to 10.10 and the failure goes away. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFNSp8biD9DTPch4RQRAqhUAKCZPvBIwyYU/HvQOd5zOjzafo8w/QCgopI7 jS7yluMV35X4/GPzcLQvWnY= =Mdkb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 12:27 ` Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-03 22:06 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-03 22:34 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-03 23:36 ` Dale Walsh 0 siblings, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-03 22:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 07:27 -0500, Dale Walsh wrote: > Well something is causing the failure and if the ubuntu/linux code- > base wasn't such a mess I'd go through and fix it myself. I'm wondering to what mess you are referring. I don't think the SPROM writing code is that bad. > I installed ubuntu 10.10 and it works so there is something in the > 10.04 CD ubuntu sent me that causes the failure so for future > reference, you can tell them to upgrade to 10.10 and the failure goes > away. I suggest you report this to the Ubuntu bugzilla. -- Greetings Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 22:06 ` Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-03 22:34 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-03 22:49 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-03 23:36 ` Dale Walsh 1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Peter Stuge @ 2011-02-03 22:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev Michael B?sch wrote: > > Well something is causing the failure and if the ubuntu/linux code- > > base wasn't such a mess I'd go through and fix it myself. > > I'm wondering to what mess you are referring. For someone whose only exposure to Linux is picking up a Ubuntu CD a Linux system as a whole is a horrible mess. Part of it is the fact that so many different components (packages if you like) are involved, and there's no way to document all of that so well in a single page executive summary, rather it's more like a week curriculum. > I don't think the SPROM writing code is that bad. I believe that the b43 code is really good. Finding it and figuring out what other code is relevant is the hard part. It's very easy to explain the neccessary parts to someone skilled, it's also easy to discover independently for the skilled person, but doing that discovery alone will take a long time. //Peter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 22:34 ` Peter Stuge @ 2011-02-03 22:49 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-03 23:47 ` Peter Stuge 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-03 22:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 23:34 +0100, Peter Stuge wrote: > Michael B?sch wrote: > > > Well something is causing the failure and if the ubuntu/linux code- > > > base wasn't such a mess I'd go through and fix it myself. > > > > I'm wondering to what mess you are referring. > > For someone whose only exposure to Linux is picking up a Ubuntu CD > a Linux system as a whole is a horrible mess. Part of it is the fact > that so many different components (packages if you like) are > involved, and there's no way to document all of that so well in a > single page executive summary, rather it's more like a week > curriculum. I'm not convinced that this is due to the Linux architecture or a lack of its documentation. You're simply unaware of the basic Unix tools that help you find what you are searching for. Luckily the tool to find something is called "find". mb at maggie:~/develop/git/wireless-testing$ find . -name '*sprom*' ./include/config/ssb/sprom.h ./drivers/ssb/sprom.o ./drivers/ssb/sprom.c ./drivers/ssb/.sprom.o.cmd ./arch/mips/include/asm/mipsprom.h You'll note that this pretty generic "find" run on the _whole_ Linux kernel yields exactly one .c source file. And guess what, it's the one you're looking for ;) > It's very easy to explain the neccessary parts to someone skilled, > it's also easy to discover independently for the skilled person, but > doing that discovery alone will take a long time. Searching the kernel source tree for the term "sprom" isn't rocket science and doesn't consume much of your valuable time. q.e.d. If you still think that there's a lack of documentation, please contribute to the Linux wireless documentation wiki. I'd be happy to see you share your knowledge with newbies. -- Greetings Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 22:49 ` Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-03 23:47 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-04 0:29 ` Michael Büsch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Peter Stuge @ 2011-02-03 23:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev Michael B?sch wrote: > > > > Well something is causing the failure and if the ubuntu/linux code- > > > > base wasn't such a mess I'd go through and fix it myself. > > > > > > I'm wondering to what mess you are referring. > > > > For someone whose only exposure to Linux is picking up a Ubuntu CD > > a Linux system as a whole is a horrible mess. Part of it is the fact > > that so many different components (packages if you like) are > > involved, and there's no way to document all of that so well in a > > single page executive summary, rather it's more like a week > > curriculum. > > I'm not convinced that this is due to the Linux architecture > or a lack of its documentation. Now you're moving on to why, which I think doesn't matter. You asked what mess, I pointed out what I believed was the original poster's point. I don't really care why. Personally I also don't really think Linux is a mess, I find it very structured, but like any modern operating system the structure can seem really complex when starting out, simply because there are so many components. > You're simply unaware of the basic Unix tools that help you find > what you are searching for. Not at all. If I was the one looking for the code that talks to hardware I'd not only know where to find it, but I'd also know every other component of hardware and software that the data passes through on the way. > Luckily the tool to find something is called "find". I think you may have missed my point. One part is certainly to know how to find a file in a Linux system, but more important is the question of what to search for (a file) and where to search (in the kernel codebase). It's not at all obvious to a newcomer where the kernel edge is, or even that the kernel is so distinct. > "find" run on the _whole_ Linux kernel yields exactly one .c source file Getting to the point where one has a feel for the kernel's scope already requires a bit of studying of the system. I've had enough experience training my customers and on a couple occasions also students to have seen many difficulties in grasping exactly what the kernel is. > > It's very easy to explain the neccessary parts to someone skilled, > > it's also easy to discover independently for the skilled person, but > > doing that discovery alone will take a long time. > > Searching the kernel source tree for the term "sprom" isn't rocket > science and doesn't consume much of your valuable time. Hopefully the above explanation helps clarify that the problem is not about finding "sprom" in the kernel source. At that point the problem is, as you point out, quite easily solved. What can take a bit of time is getting to the point of knowing where to search. > If you still think that there's a lack of documentation, please > contribute to the Linux wireless documentation wiki. I think that would be a total micro-optimization for the case that I have tried to describe. :\ > I'd be happy to see you share your knowledge with newbies. It'll make you happy then that I'm happy to share what knowledge I have. However, it's also important to choose one's battles, and I for one prefer the lecture format in this case, if only because I can speak faster than I can type. ;) //Peter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 23:47 ` Peter Stuge @ 2011-02-04 0:29 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-04 1:16 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-04 3:14 ` Dale Walsh 0 siblings, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-04 0:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 00:47 +0100, Peter Stuge wrote: > > You're simply unaware of the basic Unix tools that help you find > > what you are searching for. > > Not at all. If I was the one looking for the code that talks to > hardware I'd not only know where to find it, but I'd also know every > other component of hardware and software that the data passes through > on the way. A basic thing about software abstraction is that you do _not_ need to know what a subsystem does internally. To understand the ssb_sprom file, you do _not_ have to read one single line of sysfs code. To understand the whole SSB SPROM writing, you have to read about 200 lines of code. > > Luckily the tool to find something is called "find". > > I think you may have missed my point. One part is certainly to know > how to find a file in a Linux system, but more important is the > question of what to search for (a file) and where to search (in the > kernel codebase). It's not at all obvious to a newcomer where the > kernel edge is, or even that the kernel is so distinct. I think we're probably drifting offtopic. Why would a newcomer who doesn't even know what an operating system kernel is want to write an SSB SPROM? That guy will brick his device anyway, as he _will_ write incorrect data to the SPROM. The next thing you'll probably blame on me is that I did not document in the b43 documentation how to use a qwerty keyboard. -- Greetings Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 0:29 ` Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-04 1:16 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-04 3:14 ` Dale Walsh 1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Peter Stuge @ 2011-02-04 1:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev Michael B?sch wrote: > To understand the ssb_sprom file, you do _not_ have to read one > single line of sysfs code. Of course. But it can be important to know what sysfs is and what patterns it uses in order to see a bigger picture. > To understand the whole SSB SPROM writing, you have to read about > 200 lines of code. Yep. > > It's not at all obvious to a newcomer where the kernel edge is, > > or even that the kernel is so distinct. > > Why would a newcomer who doesn't even know what an operating system > kernel is That's not what I wrote though. I agree with you that it's important to try to be as accurate as possible. By "the kernel" I mean Linux. Someone working expertly with a completely different system may think in the (simplistic) term Ubuntu. It's a long way from that high-level view into the file with code that writes the SPROM. > want to write an SSB SPROM? As was explained, in this case a Ubuntu system was used as a tool in a production process. > That guy will brick his device anyway, as he _will_ write incorrect > data to the SPROM. I think it's possible to find a person who knows nearly every bit in the SPROM, but who knows nothing about Linux. I don't think there's correlation between the two. > The next thing you'll probably blame on me is that I did not > document in the b43 documentation how to use a qwerty keyboard. I have not and do not blame anything on you. I think you're being much too sensitive about what I wrote. It was clear (to me) that you snapped into defensive mode, and that's unfortunate since I do not believe anyone was attacking you. (I.e. saying something like Martin is stupid, Martin writes bad code, or it's Martin's fault that this code does not work on this Ubuntu version. I certainly don't suggest any of that.) I don't think that it's your fault that Linux systems are sometimes complex beasts.. :) //Peter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 0:29 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-04 1:16 ` Peter Stuge @ 2011-02-04 3:14 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 5:49 ` richardvoigt at gmail.com 2011-02-04 11:20 ` Michael Büsch 1 sibling, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-04 3:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Feb 03, 2011, at 19:29 PM, Michael B?sch wrote: > On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 00:47 +0100, Peter Stuge wrote: >>> You're simply unaware of the basic Unix tools that help you find >>> what you are searching for. >> >> Not at all. If I was the one looking for the code that talks to >> hardware I'd not only know where to find it, but I'd also know every >> other component of hardware and software that the data passes through >> on the way. > > A basic thing about software abstraction is that you do _not_ need > to know what a subsystem does internally. To understand the ssb_sprom > file, you do _not_ have to read one single line of sysfs code. > To understand the whole SSB SPROM writing, you have to read about 200 > lines of code. I see so if I can compile the ssb-sprom program I am able to perform "flashing" of SPROM's on various Broadcom based wireless cards without doing anything else, not likely since the kernel may not have the required support or functionality. A kernel compiled without the included dependancies and features doesn't support it and the linux based OS I am familiar with doesn't require rebuilding the kernel to add support or functionality to do anything but is not compatible with the the general linux distributions drivers. My opinion is that there shouldn't be any dependent code in the kernel to perform these flashing tasks. Finding all the code that relates to the Broadcom wireless device and it's functionality should be inclusive in the b43 code, having to look outside this code to find code that performs the flashing makes no sense and the use of nested abstraction layers and code buried in structs for functionality only makes it difficult for a person not familiar with the code base to locate anything and my opinion is there should be no need to look outside the b43 code. You say you don't have to recompile the kernel to add support for things, I remember initially working with ubuntu 8.01 and having to recompile the kernel to add support for the Broadcom wireless cards because downloading and installing a wireless kernel package someone else made that only allowed flashing of some cards was useless. Rewriting the nVidia drivers was something else I did since 8.0.1 didn't seem to support multiple cards and having to install a blob provided by nvidia to make the card work and seeing this popup explaining the license of the third-party (nVidia) software was a waste of time so this was dumped in favor of my own code which included a HAL source file for the 6k and 7k series cards, not exactly legally obtained. After my 8.01 experience I decided that if the OS doesn't come with the required support it's of no value to me, when the working 10 was provided on disk I didn't have to do anything or at the very least only minimal before flashing and since no instructions were provided telling me that I had to do anything other but reinstall the software I expected it to work as intended. Since it seems that wireless support is now pretty much included it's improving but when stuff doesn't work, someone involved should be knowledgeable enough to know why and or to suggest commands that might help isolate the cause of the failure, it might have been user induced but it appears that after the installation of 10.10 we can conclude it's not a user related error since it works properly. > >>> Luckily the tool to find something is called "find". You can tell "find" to find only the code specifically related to flashing SPROM's??? >> >> I think you may have missed my point. One part is certainly to know >> how to find a file in a Linux system, but more important is the >> question of what to search for (a file) and where to search (in the >> kernel codebase). It's not at all obvious to a newcomer where the >> kernel edge is, or even that the kernel is so distinct. > > I think we're probably drifting offtopic. Why would a newcomer who > doesn't even know what an operating system kernel is want to > write an SSB SPROM? That guy will brick his device anyway, as > he _will_ write incorrect data to the SPROM. Making assumptions about some ones knowledge or experience is not a good thing and I have revealed nothing that would make any intelligent person conclude this with them first asking pertinent questions. Stating I will brick cards because you lack the capacity to distinguish intelligence from frustration doesn't look good on you and you should have asked questions before making such a grand assumption, I have flashed more than 10,000 cards and have not bricked one, I have had cards that I have tried to alter LED behavior stop functioning because they have unsupported firmware versions that the application doesn't properly support but I understand that there is a risk involved in making changes so I limit my changes to avoid that conundrum. When you can decode a DXE from an intel motherboard BIOS, contact me, we might have something we can discuss. > The next thing you'll probably blame on me is that I did not > document in > the b43 documentation how to use a qwerty keyboard. > -- > Greetings Michael. > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFNS28siD9DTPch4RQRArguAJwKOPyljoMsinW0P2SXR0X1UzN3VACfS75E fPwdXvX5/8BCM6IYyoIl/UI= =T6qS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 3:14 ` Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-04 5:49 ` richardvoigt at gmail.com 2011-02-04 12:06 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 11:20 ` Michael Büsch 1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: richardvoigt at gmail.com @ 2011-02-04 5:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev > You say you don't have to recompile the kernel to add support for things, I > remember initially working with ubuntu 8.01 and having to recompile the > kernel to add support for the Broadcom wireless cards because downloading > and installing a wireless kernel package someone else made that only allowed > flashing of some cards was useless. This is not something you need to recompile the kernel to do. You do need the kernel source code (check your package manager) and the config used by the running kernel (available in a pseudo-file) and that's enough to do an out-of-tree build of your driver. The idea that a user-mode application should be able to update firmware without kernel help is patently ridiculous no matter what (modern general-purpose) operating system you are expert in, since it requires I/O privileges that are not held by user-mode applications. But such an application can be distributed with the source code and build system for an out-of-tree build of the relevant kernel code, in which case administrator rights will be needed to insert the kernel module, but the installation process needn't involve replacing any boot files as would be done after a kernel recompile. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 5:49 ` richardvoigt at gmail.com @ 2011-02-04 12:06 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 12:21 ` Michael Büsch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-04 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Feb 04, 2011, at 00:49 AM, richardvoigt at gmail.com wrote: >> You say you don't have to recompile the kernel to add support for >> things, I >> remember initially working with ubuntu 8.01 and having to >> recompile the >> kernel to add support for the Broadcom wireless cards because >> downloading >> and installing a wireless kernel package someone else made that >> only allowed >> flashing of some cards was useless. > > This is not something you need to recompile the kernel to do. You do > need the kernel source code (check your package manager) and the > config used by the running kernel (available in a pseudo-file) and > that's enough to do an out-of-tree build of your driver. > > The idea that a user-mode application should be able to update > firmware without kernel help is patently ridiculous no matter what > (modern general-purpose) operating system you are expert in, since it > requires I/O privileges that are not held by user-mode applications. > But such an application can be distributed with the source code and > build system for an out-of-tree build of the relevant kernel code, in > which case administrator rights will be needed to insert the kernel > module, but the installation process needn't involve replacing any > boot files as would be done after a kernel recompile. > I made no claim that kernel help was not required to perform a task, I only know what I have experienced in the past regarding flashing Broadcom devices. If that really is the case, then why when building and installing it does it create such a large package and install a kernel and support files and modify the grub menu rather than install just the required driver and application and allow it to function regardless of the selected kernel? When I was working in 8.01 the application and b43 driver alone was insufficient to allow flashing, this may be different in newer versions but at that time I was unable to make it work without installing all kinds of stuff (the full pkg) and selecting the modified kernel in the boot loader menu in order to flash the cards otherwise it refused to write to any of the BCM94321 I had claiming it was an unsupported PHY and would not allow operation on it. As I recall further, I had to make patches to disable certain checks so it would allow writing to any Broadcom cards rather than certain cards and some simple apps to change the ID's in the file and recalculate the checksum were simple since this is the only required changes, I don't need to know what the other bytes represent since these are not being altered. I've worked in FreeBSD, Darwin (not Mac OS X) and Mac OS X and I have never had any issues accessing kernel or user space or even modifying protected resources or memory on the fly. There are API's and frameworks to handle those accesses and it's a matter of utilizing the correct framework. I've converted all kinds of drivers from the ubuntu tree to run under Mac OS X and for the most part the majority of the code is discarded due to the specific kernel ties. I wrote an application to take existing nVidia SPROM firmware image form the card, generate an EFI compatible firmware image, merge the two images, correct checksums and firmware size and then reflash the card (as long as the SPROM is large enough to contain the new image) occurs in about 800 lines of C code and no driver is required to be loaded, it finds the device on the PCI bus by ID and there is nothing in the ubuntu tree that contains this functionality otherwise I would have borrowed it. If you wish to knit-pick over details knock yourself out but you need to stop making assumptions about what I know and don't know. Explaining in great detail serves no real purpose other than bragging and I really have nothing to contribute to the b43 driver or ubuntu so explicit details on the b43 code is of no concern to me, it either works or it doesn't, if it doesn't then I look for a solution, if it does then I have a flashing solution and don't need to look further. It also seems that people involved with these projects are too sensitive, if you don't say something just right or don't mention something they get bent out of shape and go off attacking people labeling them as morons and idiots, very professional for someone involved in a public project who goal is to support the code they provide. I'm not familiar with the code base because after looking at all the files I've personally decided it's a structured mess and I will go to the group responsible for a particular piece of code when I have issues rather than waste months of time learning the code base so I can fix it myself, far too time consuming for something that serves a single purpose and needs to work immediately. If there was no solution then I would have to spend the time creating something but re-inventing the wheel is an exercise in poor time management when time is not something you have. 10.04 is broken, 10.10 works, and this satisfies me, going back and playing with 10.04 to find out why or playing with an upgrade path is not something I have time for and the condescending attitudes makes it less attractive. If someone else comes experiencing this issue you can inform them that 10.10 works as verified by others as well and that should pretty much be the end of it unless they have the time and want to spend the time digging further but I would suggest curbing the attitude and taking a more relaxed approach if you really want to receive assistance in debugging things. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFNS+u4iD9DTPch4RQRAiktAKCXXcspz5QJrMxln4rociQScPyMVACfWDT6 TZBLZD8AA0yTpU799s4/DkE= =cbz0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 12:06 ` Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-04 12:21 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-04 21:38 ` Dale Walsh 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-04 12:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 07:06 -0500, Dale Walsh wrote: > If you wish to knit-pick over details knock yourself out but you need > to stop making assumptions about what I know and don't know. No. You really just need to stop guessing around. > Explaining in great detail serves no real purpose I already figured out that you're not interested in falsifications of your flawed logics. > It also seems that people involved with these projects are too > sensitive, if you don't say something just right or don't mention > something they get bent out of shape and go off attacking people > labeling them as morons and idiots, very professional for someone > involved in a public project who goal is to support the code they > provide. Please quote me with context saying that you're a moron or an idiot. YOU are the one getting personal. YOU are the one who claimed in the first place that our software was crap. > I'm not familiar with the code base because after looking at all the > files I've personally decided it's a structured mess See? -- Greetings Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 12:21 ` Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-04 21:38 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 22:22 ` Ehud Gavron ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-04 21:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev Be smart, let it go. On Feb 04, 2011, at 07:21 AM, Michael B?sch wrote: > On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 07:06 -0500, Dale Walsh wrote: >> If you wish to knit-pick over details knock yourself out but you need >> to stop making assumptions about what I know and don't know. > > No. You really just need to stop guessing around. What guessing? > >> Explaining in great detail serves no real purpose > > I already figured out that you're not interested in falsifications of > your flawed logics. More dribble which has nothing to do with your code not working in ubuntu 10.04. >> It also seems that people involved with these projects are too >> sensitive, if you don't say something just right or don't mention >> something they get bent out of shape and go off attacking people >> labeling them as morons and idiots, very professional for someone >> involved in a public project who goal is to support the code they >> provide. > > Please quote me with context saying that you're a moron or an idiot. Are you really that slow that you don't know and can't recall what you wrote or see the implications when you state what you believe to be factual without foundation? If I put my car key in the ignition of my car, turn it and nothing happens I call the dealer because it's obviously broken. You most likely would interpret that statement to be only what is stated and have some smart-assed comment that implies I'm not smart enough to determine if there is an electrical issue such as a dead battery preventing the car from starting or I didn't turn the key far enough and I conclude this based on the way in which you respond not only to me but others. --- START OF QUOTE --- On Feb 03, 2011, at 19:29 PM, Michael B?sch wrote: > That guy will brick his device anyway, as > he _will_ write incorrect data to the SPROM. --- END OF QUOTE --- > YOU are the one getting personal. YOU are the one who claimed in > the first place that our software was crap. > >> I'm not familiar with the code base because after looking at all the >> files I've personally decided it's a structured mess > > See? I specifically state it is my personal decision regarding the state of the source tree, are you now accepting responsibility for the entire ubuntu source tree? The remark does not attack your code and I am not the only person who has a poor opinion regarding the state of the ubuntu source tree. If you want to be responsible for a public project that offers public support that's great but expect that issue will come up and people will expect support and this has nothing to do with the purpose for which they use the software, my opinion is this, it's a public project which offers support and you seem to be the leader so, if it's broke, fix it, if it isn't broke attempt to help the user in a kind and courteous manner and if you can't be kind and courteous don't involve yourself in assisting them, they are already frustrated enough by the fact that the software doesn't work the way they expect it to that they don't need to be further aggravated by a person offering support. > -- > Greetings Michael. My comments about you are generalized and in defense of not only remarks and statements you have made towards me but also others. You really don't appear to have enough common sense to let things go and believe you have made no attacks on anyone at any time which is sad at best but you are who you are. When I receive off-list comments from users who are afraid to ask questions because of the way in which you and others appear to respond to people in general who are less knowledgeable than you about your code or the code base in general, this only further substantiates my opinion that you should seek professional help and refrain from responding to any pleas for assistance because you don't and wont play nice with others. Others have chimed in and made comments regarding your condescending attitude and behavior but you seem to relish in the arguments, my personal opinion of you as a sane and respectful party who has the best interest of the b43 project they claim to represent has sunk so low that it's not publicly possible to state it without violating some law. If people didn't think you were so important to the project and had a replacement they would have dumped you years ago, they accept your antics because it's the trade-off they are willing to accept and many people from this list have made this comment to me, the difference is, I don't mind saying it publicly. Because they are willing to accept it doesn't mean every person who comes into contact with you must and I certainly don't. Do yourself a favor and let it go, it's not beneficial to the project to act in this manner and it is my observation that you really seem to have no common sense regarding your treatment towards others when you can make unfounded remarks about an individual as if it were factual. I understand how people with power will abuse that power when ever someone questions their actions and attitudes -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20110204/4064abe1/attachment-0001.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 188 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20110204/4064abe1/attachment-0001.sig> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 21:38 ` Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-04 22:22 ` Ehud Gavron 2011-02-04 22:26 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-04 22:29 ` Rafał Miłecki 2 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Ehud Gavron @ 2011-02-04 22:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On 02/04/2011 02:38 PM, Dale Walsh wrote: > Be smart, let it go. Great advice, Dale. One day when Michael is a leech and a noncontributor I'm sure he'll listen to you. Go take your own advice. Now. E -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20110204/5e632048/attachment.html> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 21:38 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 22:22 ` Ehud Gavron @ 2011-02-04 22:26 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-04 22:29 ` Rafał Miłecki 2 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-04 22:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 16:38 -0500, Dale Walsh wrote: > Be smart, let it go. > Are you really that slow I'll leave it as an exercise to you to find all the personal insults in this quote. > If I put my car key in the ignition of my car, turn it and nothing > happens I call the dealer because it's obviously broken. > You most likely would interpret that statement to be only what is > stated and have some smart-assed comment that implies I'm not smart > enough to determine if there is an electrical issue such as a dead > battery preventing the car from starting or I didn't turn the key far > enough and I conclude this based on the way in which you respond not > only to me but others. You probably forgot to put gas into the car. > --- START OF QUOTE --- > On Feb 03, 2011, at 19:29 PM, Michael B?sch wrote: > > That guy will brick his device anyway, as > > he _will_ write incorrect data to the SPROM. > --- END OF QUOTE --- I fail to find the words "idiot" and "moron" in this quote. q.e.d. > I specifically state it is my personal decision regarding the state of > the source tree, are you now accepting responsibility for the entire > ubuntu source tree? Why would I? I am not an Ubuntu developer. Why would I have any responsibility for a single line of code in their distribution? Do you notice the flawed logics? > If you want to be responsible for a public project that offers public > support that's great but expect that issue will come up and people > will expect support and this has nothing to do with the purpose for > which they use the software, my opinion is this, it's a public > project which offers support and you seem to be the leader so, if it's > broke, fix it, if it isn't broke attempt to help the user in a kind > and courteous manner and if you can't be kind and courteous don't > involve yourself in assisting them, they are already frustrated enough > by the fact that the software doesn't work the way they expect it to > that they don't need to be further aggravated by a person offering > support. So the situation is: I put my free time into a project that probably helps people. And you're essentially complaining that I don't put enough of my valuable free time into the project? Who are you to judge where I'm supposed to spend my free time? We are not your personal support army. You got our code for free. For free as in beer and as in freedom. Without any implied warranties. Deal with it. You know what? If I knew you in real life and you bitched about a birthday present I gave you, it would be the very last present you got from me. > You really don't appear to have enough common sense to let things go > and believe you have made no attacks on anyone at any time which is > sad at best but you are who you are. Uh, talking about common sense. I'm deeply sorry that I personally attacked you with my C sourcecode. Where am I supposed to send the gift hamper to? > When I receive off-list comments from users who are afraid to ask > questions because of the way in which you and others appear to respond > to people in general who are less knowledgeable than you about your > code or the code base in general, You probably think that you're the only one getting supportive off-list comments from people. Guess what? You're possibly wrong. > this only further substantiates my opinion that you should seek > professional help and refrain from responding to any pleas for > assistance because you don't and wont play nice with others. Oh, professional help. Here we go. > Others have chimed in and made comments regarding your condescending > attitude and behavior but you seem to relish in the arguments, my > personal opinion of you as a sane and respectful party who has the > best interest of the b43 project they claim to represent has sunk so > low that it's not publicly possible to state it without violating some > law. Wow. I think that reveals more of your attitude than of mine. > If people didn't think you were so important to the project and had a > replacement they would have dumped you years ago, they accept your > antics because it's the trade-off they are willing to accept and many > people from this list have made this comment to me, the difference is, > I don't mind saying it publicly. If you had followed b43 development remotely, you would have noticed that I'm certainly not an important person to the project. Larry, Rafal and all those others working on LP and N support are way more important to the project than me. And that's fine. > Do yourself a favor and let it go, it's not beneficial to the project > to act in this manner and it is my observation that you really seem to > have no common sense regarding your treatment towards others when you > can make unfounded remarks about an individual as if it were factual. You're pretty entertaining. And that's actually the only reason I reply to your mails. -- Greetings Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 21:38 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 22:22 ` Ehud Gavron 2011-02-04 22:26 ` Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-04 22:29 ` Rafał Miłecki 2 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Rafał Miłecki @ 2011-02-04 22:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev 2011/2/4 Dale Walsh <dale@daleenterprise.com>: > Be smart, let it go. > > (...) > > If I put my car key in the ignition of my car, turn it and nothing happens I > call the dealer because it's?obviously?broken. Then call your dealer, not ignition producer. Find other ppl to troll with, nobody here is interested. Michael: you don great job for Linux, your replies are fine but we have to agree there is no sense about that. Dale don't want to understand/agree and he won't. I strongly suggest re-applying your filter you got on old machine ;) -- Rafa? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 3:14 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 5:49 ` richardvoigt at gmail.com @ 2011-02-04 11:20 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-04 12:17 ` Dale Walsh 1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-04 11:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 22:14 -0500, Dale Walsh wrote: > I see so if I can compile the ssb-sprom program I am able to perform > "flashing" of SPROM's on various Broadcom based wireless cards > without doing anything else, not likely since the kernel may not have > the required support or functionality. > > A kernel compiled without the included dependancies and features > doesn't support it and the linux based OS I am familiar with doesn't > require rebuilding the kernel to add support or functionality to do > anything but is not compatible with the the general linux > distributions drivers. > > My opinion is that there shouldn't be any dependent code in the > kernel to perform these flashing tasks. > > Finding all the code that relates to the Broadcom wireless device and > it's functionality should be inclusive in the b43 code, having to > look outside this code to find code that performs the flashing makes > no sense and the use of nested abstraction layers and code buried in > structs for functionality only makes it difficult for a person not > familiar with the code base to locate anything and my opinion is > there should be no need to look outside the b43 code. Wow, it's really funny to read your mail. That stuff is so clueless and ridiculous... You must be the master troll. I do actually remember why I put you into my mailfilters back in 2008. I did one mistake, however. I later reinstalled the machine and did not put the filters back. To say once again what I already said in 2008: We are not your personal support army for your questionable business. -- Greetings Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 11:20 ` Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-04 12:17 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 16:55 ` Michael Büsch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-04 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Feb 04, 2011, at 06:20 AM, Michael B?sch wrote: > On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 22:14 -0500, Dale Walsh wrote: >> I see so if I can compile the ssb-sprom program I am able to perform >> "flashing" of SPROM's on various Broadcom based wireless cards >> without doing anything else, not likely since the kernel may not have >> the required support or functionality. >> >> A kernel compiled without the included dependancies and features >> doesn't support it and the linux based OS I am familiar with doesn't >> require rebuilding the kernel to add support or functionality to do >> anything but is not compatible with the the general linux >> distributions drivers. >> >> My opinion is that there shouldn't be any dependent code in the >> kernel to perform these flashing tasks. >> >> Finding all the code that relates to the Broadcom wireless device and >> it's functionality should be inclusive in the b43 code, having to >> look outside this code to find code that performs the flashing makes >> no sense and the use of nested abstraction layers and code buried in >> structs for functionality only makes it difficult for a person not >> familiar with the code base to locate anything and my opinion is >> there should be no need to look outside the b43 code. > > Wow, it's really funny to read your mail. > That stuff is so clueless and ridiculous... You must be the > master troll. > > I do actually remember why I put you into my mailfilters back in 2008. > I did one mistake, however. I later reinstalled the machine and did > not put the filters back. > > To say once again what I already said in 2008: > We are not your personal support army for your questionable business. > > -- > Greetings Michael. Support the code you provide publicly is your purpose, me fixing it for you is not support. What questionable business? It's against the law to modify a cards ID's? You like the ubuntu code base and that is your choice, mine is different, I believe it suffers from poor management and it is not your place to dictate what my opinion should be. Since you acknowledge you are responsible for this b43 code then make sure it works and I wont have to come asking why it doesn't and why you broke it, or are you now acknowledging that it's not sound code and is questionable if it works type of software? You know what, no need to respond, you have nothing intelligent to add as evident of your responses so do yourself a favor and don't bother and it will die off. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFNS+5WiD9DTPch4RQRAgaSAJ4pU3bhBFOY/ehD4xSDO3pYr7zwagCghYsI kTzJpdRSJH5CtJ1mIcUeM/E= =g6E+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-04 12:17 ` Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-04 16:55 ` Michael Büsch 0 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-04 16:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev > Support the code you provide publicly is your purpose, me fixing it? > for you is not support. So far there was no fix needed, because it's not broken. > What questionable business? > > It's against the law to modify a cards ID's? Don't get me started with "law". You're distributing quite a few interresting files on your public http server's download area. > You like the ubuntu code base and that is your choice, i did not say that. ? > different, I believe it suffers from poor management and it is not? > your place to dictate what my opinion should be. > > Since you acknowledge you are responsible for this b43 code then make no i don't. i currently am the ssb maintainer. > You know what, no need to respond, you have nothing intelligent to? > add as evident of your responses as I said. You are the one who drives this discussion into the nontechnical corner. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20110204/770bb988/attachment.html> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 22:06 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-03 22:34 ` Peter Stuge @ 2011-02-03 23:36 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-03 23:49 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-04 0:17 ` Michael Büsch 1 sibling, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-03 23:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Feb 03, 2011, at 17:06 PM, Michael B?sch wrote: > On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 07:27 -0500, Dale Walsh wrote: >> Well something is causing the failure and if the ubuntu/linux code- >> base wasn't such a mess I'd go through and fix it myself. > > I'm wondering to what mess you are referring. > I don't think the SPROM writing code is that bad. The SPROM writing code itself might not be so bad but the b43 code has stuff all over the place and scavenging through all the files trying to find the relevant material would require more time that I have to get a working solution, not exactly what I'd call cohesive when you start looking at code and you have to look all over the place to find stuff, my dislike is in the structure or I should state lack of. This is not to say that the package as a whole is not good but having to rebuild a kernel to add driver support is in my opinion a poor design concept, drivers should be standalone and not require additional code inserted in the kernel to obtain functionality. If I could extract the code and generate a standalone app to perform the flash it would make it much easier to resolve write issues. >> I installed ubuntu 10.10 and it works so there is something in the >> 10.04 CD ubuntu sent me that causes the failure so for future >> reference, you can tell them to upgrade to 10.10 and the failure goes >> away. > > I suggest you report this to the Ubuntu bugzilla. Report what? It's mentioned that the code is messed up and 10.10 works so what's the point in mentioning it again. > -- > Greetings Michael. > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFNSzv3iD9DTPch4RQRAphvAJwI0fqzUziWjdNGOMs56qF3Ns0ZiACZAds8 tcwE4srP+t7ojMhQUgGaOUc= =U5xc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 23:36 ` Dale Walsh @ 2011-02-03 23:49 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-04 0:17 ` Michael Büsch 1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Peter Stuge @ 2011-02-03 23:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev Dale Walsh wrote: >> I suggest you report this to the Ubuntu bugzilla. > > Report what? > > It's mentioned that the code is messed up and 10.10 works so what's > the point in mentioning it again. I'm not sure of how Ubuntu updates work, but maybe 10.04 could get an update which fixes the problem. Even if that's not relevant for your 10.10 use case it would be a nice thing to do in order to help others who may potentially run into the same issue, using 10.04. //Peter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? 2011-02-03 23:36 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-03 23:49 ` Peter Stuge @ 2011-02-04 0:17 ` Michael Büsch 1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Büsch @ 2011-02-04 0:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b43-dev On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 18:36 -0500, Dale Walsh wrote: > The SPROM writing code itself might not be so bad but the b43 code > has stuff all over the place and scavenging through all the files > trying to find the relevant material would require more time that I > have to get a working solution, not exactly what I'd call cohesive > when you start looking at code and you have to look all over the > place to find stuff, my dislike is in the structure or I should state > lack of. Claiming a distaste for the spread of code into subsystems and the lack of structure at the same time is an interesting thing to do... As I mentioned before: You do not have to dig through all those files. There are fast and easy to use standard Unix tools that do this job for you. > This is not to say that the package as a whole is not good but having > to rebuild a kernel to add driver support is in my opinion a poor > design concept, drivers should be standalone and not require > additional code inserted in the kernel to obtain functionality. Yeah, and that is why there is absolutely no need to recompile the kernel, if you want to add a driver. _Especially_ not for wireless. The Linux wireless developers maintain the compat-wireless package, which is a major effort for the only purpose of end-user convenience. > If I could extract the code and generate a standalone app to perform > the flash it would make it much easier to resolve write issues. ssb-sprom basically _is_ the standalone app to perform sprom modification. For the actual "flashing" (it's not flash) you'll need kernel support, naturally. There's no sane way around that requirement. The kernel part is tiny, and you will always need it. > >> I installed ubuntu 10.10 and it works so there is something in the > >> 10.04 CD ubuntu sent me that causes the failure so for future > >> reference, you can tell them to upgrade to 10.10 and the failure goes > >> away. > > > > I suggest you report this to the Ubuntu bugzilla. > > Report what? Report that SSB SPROM writing is broken in Ubuntu 10.04, so that Ubuntu developers can fix it. There's no way I can fix that, because I am an upstream maintainer. And my upstream code is OK as of latest revision. > It's mentioned that the code is messed up For a proper technical conversation it's always a good idea to avoid unqualified and unproven claims. That basically leads nowhere, except for aggressive replies. -- Greetings Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-02-04 22:29 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 29+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2011-02-01 11:23 unable to write flashrom, functionality broken? Dale Walsh 2011-02-01 12:51 ` Rafał Miłecki 2011-02-01 12:57 ` Ehud Gavron 2011-02-01 16:28 ` Larry Finger 2011-02-02 7:50 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-03 3:27 ` Larry Finger 2011-02-03 11:49 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-03 11:59 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-03 12:27 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-03 22:06 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-03 22:34 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-03 22:49 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-03 23:47 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-04 0:29 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-04 1:16 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-04 3:14 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 5:49 ` richardvoigt at gmail.com 2011-02-04 12:06 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 12:21 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-04 21:38 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 22:22 ` Ehud Gavron 2011-02-04 22:26 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-04 22:29 ` Rafał Miłecki 2011-02-04 11:20 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-04 12:17 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-04 16:55 ` Michael Büsch 2011-02-03 23:36 ` Dale Walsh 2011-02-03 23:49 ` Peter Stuge 2011-02-04 0:17 ` Michael Büsch
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).
