status of ipw2x00

status of ipw2x00

[Tom Gundersen]

Hi guys,

I'm the udev maintainer for Arch Linux, and we have been running into
some problems with the ipw2200 driver[0]. This was most probably
exposed by changes in recent versions of udev, as outlined here [1]
(so will eventually hit the other distros when they upgrade).

I see that the ipw2x00 drivers are listed as Orphaned in MANTAINERS,
and I notice that 2000-series Wireless-N support was added to iwlagn.

Does this mean that we (as a dristro) should drop the ipw2x00 driver
in favor of iwlagn, or do they actualy support different hardware? I
was not able to find any reference to 2000-series Wireless-N chips on
intel.com, so I'm not really sure what hardware this "Intel(R)
Centrino(R) Wireless-N 2200D BGN" is referring to (if it is not [2].
Furthermore, I noticed that the modaliases of the two drivers do not
overlap, which should indicate that they do not support the same
hardware, is that correct?

If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?

Any help appreciated.

Cheers,

Tom

[0] <https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/28097>
[1] <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/217729>
[2] <http://www.intel.com/support/wireless/wlan/pro2200bg/sb/cs-009093.htm>

Re: status of ipw2x00

[Johannes Berg]

On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 14:42 +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:

> I'm the udev maintainer for Arch Linux, and we have been running into
> some problems with the ipw2200 driver[0]. This was most probably
> exposed by changes in recent versions of udev, as outlined here [1]
> (so will eventually hit the other distros when they upgrade).
> 
> I see that the ipw2x00 drivers are listed as Orphaned in MANTAINERS,
> and I notice that 2000-series Wireless-N support was added to iwlagn.
> 
> Does this mean that we (as a dristro) should drop the ipw2x00 driver
> in favor of iwlagn, or do they actualy support different hardware? I
> was not able to find any reference to 2000-series Wireless-N chips on
> intel.com, so I'm not really sure what hardware this "Intel(R)
> Centrino(R) Wireless-N 2200D BGN" is referring to (if it is not [2].
> Furthermore, I noticed that the modaliases of the two drivers do not
> overlap, which should indicate that they do not support the same
> hardware, is that correct?

Yes, it's unfortunate but true -- ipw 2200 and the current 2200 devices
are completely different hardware, there's no overlap.

johannes

Re: status of ipw2x00

[Tom Gundersen]

Hi Johannes,

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Johannes Berg
<johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> Yes, it's unfortunate but true -- ipw 2200 and the current 2200 devices
> are completely different hardware, there's no overlap.

Thanks for the clarification.

Tom

Re: status of ipw2x00

[wwguy]

Hi Tom,

On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 06:55 -0800, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 14:42 +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> 
> > I'm the udev maintainer for Arch Linux, and we have been running into
> > some problems with the ipw2200 driver[0]. This was most probably
> > exposed by changes in recent versions of udev, as outlined here [1]
> > (so will eventually hit the other distros when they upgrade).
> > 
> > I see that the ipw2x00 drivers are listed as Orphaned in MANTAINERS,
> > and I notice that 2000-series Wireless-N support was added to iwlagn.
> > 
> > Does this mean that we (as a dristro) should drop the ipw2x00 driver
> > in favor of iwlagn, or do they actualy support different hardware? I
> > was not able to find any reference to 2000-series Wireless-N chips on
> > intel.com, so I'm not really sure what hardware this "Intel(R)
> > Centrino(R) Wireless-N 2200D BGN" is referring to (if it is not [2].
> > Furthermore, I noticed that the modaliases of the two drivers do not
> > overlap, which should indicate that they do not support the same
> > hardware, is that correct?
> 
> Yes, it's unfortunate but true -- ipw 2200 and the current 2200 devices
> are completely different hardware, there's no overlap.
> 

Johannes is correct, 2200 series are our latest release which using
mac80211(softMAC) approach. it is different from ipw2200, sorry.

Thanks
Wey
> 

MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[John W. Linville]

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:42:52PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:

> If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
> interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?

Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
important? :-)

If someone wants to be the ipw2x00 maintainer, all they need to do
is start sending some non-broken patches...

John
-- 
John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com			might be all we have.  Be ready.

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Dan Williams]

On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 13:44 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:42:52PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> 
> > If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
> > interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?
> 
> Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
> public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
> important? :-)
> 
> If someone wants to be the ipw2x00 maintainer, all they need to do
> is start sending some non-broken patches...

I'd be willing to donate an ipw2200 to somebody who steps up to maintain
the driver.  I'll even consider paying postage.  Note that you'll need
to have a machine with a MiniPCI slot, or a desktop machine with PCI and
a PCI->MiniPCI adapter card.

Dan

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Florian Fainelli]

On Monday 30 January 2012 20:55:15 Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 13:44 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:42:52PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> > > If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
> > > interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?
> > 
> > Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
> > public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
> > important? :-)
> > 
> > If someone wants to be the ipw2x00 maintainer, all they need to do
> > is start sending some non-broken patches...
> 
> I'd be willing to donate an ipw2200 to somebody who steps up to maintain
> the driver.  I'll even consider paying postage.  Note that you'll need
> to have a machine with a MiniPCI slot, or a desktop machine with PCI and
> a PCI->MiniPCI adapter card.

I can also send a mini-pci ipw2200-based board to anyone interested. Hint: 
having two cards is also convenient.
--
Florian

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Dan Williams]

On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 21:13 +0100, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On Monday 30 January 2012 20:55:15 Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 13:44 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:42:52PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> > > > If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
> > > > interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?
> > > 
> > > Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
> > > public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
> > > important? :-)
> > > 
> > > If someone wants to be the ipw2x00 maintainer, all they need to do
> > > is start sending some non-broken patches...
> > 
> > I'd be willing to donate an ipw2200 to somebody who steps up to maintain
> > the driver.  I'll even consider paying postage.  Note that you'll need
> > to have a machine with a MiniPCI slot, or a desktop machine with PCI and
> > a PCI->MiniPCI adapter card.
> 
> I can also send a mini-pci ipw2200-based board to anyone interested. Hint: 
> having two cards is also convenient.

I'll raise you a 2915 (which is the 802.11a capable part that also uses
the ipw2200 driver) if the person who steps up is really motivated :)

Dan

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Julian Calaby]

Hi,

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 05:44, John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:42:52PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>
>> If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
>> interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?
>
> Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
> public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
> important? :-)
>
> If someone wants to be the ipw2x00 maintainer, all they need to do
> is start sending some non-broken patches...

I'd love to do this, and even have the hardware already, but I lack the time =(

Thanks,

-- 
Julian Calaby

Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/
.Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Florian Fainelli]

On Monday 30 January 2012 22:47:06 Julian Calaby wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 05:44, John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> 
wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:42:52PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> >> If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
> >> interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?
> > 
> > Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
> > public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
> > important? :-)
> > 
> > If someone wants to be the ipw2x00 maintainer, all they need to do
> > is start sending some non-broken patches...
> 
> I'd love to do this, and even have the hardware already, but I lack the
> time =(

Maybe if you receive more hardware you will get some motivation again for 
doing it :)
-- 
Florian

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Julian Calaby]

Hi,

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 08:52, Florian Fainelli <florian@openwrt.org> wrote:
> On Monday 30 January 2012 22:47:06 Julian Calaby wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 05:44, John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:42:52PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>> >> If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
>> >> interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?
>> >
>> > Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
>> > public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
>> > important? :-)
>> >
>> > If someone wants to be the ipw2x00 maintainer, all they need to do
>> > is start sending some non-broken patches...
>>
>> I'd love to do this, and even have the hardware already, but I lack the
>> time =(
>
> Maybe if you receive more hardware you will get some motivation again for
> doing it :)

That's a nice thought, but my life at the moment is work all week,
crash on the weekends. More hardware is always nice, but, unless I'm
rather mistaken, more hardware != more time.

I'll try to have a poke at the source this week and see if anything
useful happens.

If anyone is actually planning to send me hardware - if I start doing
useful stuff to this driver, please wait until after I've started
sending patches.

Thanks,

-- 
Julian Calaby

Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/
.Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Francois Romieu]

John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> :
[...]
> Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
> public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
> important? :-)

You are talking about my laptop.

Ok, I'll break it myself.

-- 
Ueimor

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Stanislav Yakovlev]

Hi John,

On 30 January 2012 21:44, John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:42:52PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>
>> If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
>> interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?
>
> Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
> public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
> important? :-)
>
> If someone wants to be the ipw2x00 maintainer, all they need to do
> is start sending some non-broken patches...

I would volunteer taking ipw2x00 driver maintenance if it is ok with everyone.

I have already sent a few patches to ipw2x00:
f961e34ebef84b532ec6c477f73b66d9a8b0ddbc and
6e6ae9ddf0bc19ce066ed2f66f7a52b827e4514e.

Stanislav.

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[yao zhao]

I can volunteer too although I haven't committed any patches yet!

yao

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Stanislav Yakovlev
<stas.yakovlev@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> On 30 January 2012 21:44, John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:42:52PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>>
>>> If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
>>> interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?
>>
>> Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
>> public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
>> important? :-)
>>
>> If someone wants to be the ipw2x00 maintainer, all they need to do
>> is start sending some non-broken patches...
>
> I would volunteer taking ipw2x00 driver maintenance if it is ok with everyone.
>
> I have already sent a few patches to ipw2x00:
> f961e34ebef84b532ec6c477f73b66d9a8b0ddbc and
> 6e6ae9ddf0bc19ce066ed2f66f7a52b827e4514e.
>
> Stanislav.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Stanislaw Gruszka]

On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 11:58:03PM +0300, Stanislav Yakovlev wrote:
> Hi John,
> 
> On 30 January 2012 21:44, John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:42:52PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> >
> >> If we are not able to drop the 2x00 drivers, are anyone still
> >> interested in working on them to fix the firmware loading?
> >
> > Anyone out there looking for a project?  A way to "break-in" to the
> > public Linux community without the risk of breaking anything too
> > important? :-)
> >
> > If someone wants to be the ipw2x00 maintainer, all they need to do
> > is start sending some non-broken patches...
> 
> I would volunteer taking ipw2x00 driver maintenance if it is ok with everyone.

Hi Stanislav

Perhaps you should post a patch that change ipw2x00 entry on MAINTAINERS
file.

Are you plan to fix issues caused on current firmware loading changes on
linux ? We have a few bug reports about that:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783708
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802106

Stanislaw

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Stanislav Yakovlev]

Hi Stanislaw,

On 15 March 2012 04:02, Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com> wrote:
> Are you plan to fix issues caused on current firmware loading changes on
> linux?

I was able to reproduce this issue; unfortunately, I don't have a
proper fix for it yet.

> We have a few bug reports about that:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783708
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802106

Thanks for the info, I will take a look.

Stanislav.

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Thu, 15 Mar 2012, Stanislav Yakovlev wrote:
> On 15 March 2012 04:02, Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Are you plan to fix issues caused on current firmware loading changes on
> > linux?
> 
> I was able to reproduce this issue; unfortunately, I don't have a
> proper fix for it yet.

Maybe you could delay the firmware load to when the device is opened (at
which point you can probably change the driver to keep the device in PCI
D3 state unless it is opened, which does save power), and just caching
the firmware forever after the first load so that you don't need to
request_firmware anything more than once.

Chances are ipw2xxx firmware will never get a new revision anyway, so
reloading the modules is not too large a price to pay if the user does
decide he has to force a firmware refresh...

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Stanislav Yakovlev]

Hello Henrique,

On 17 March 2012 07:36, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Mar 2012, Stanislav Yakovlev wrote:
>> On 15 March 2012 04:02, Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > Are you plan to fix issues caused on current firmware loading changes on
>> > linux?
>>
>> I was able to reproduce this issue; unfortunately, I don't have a
>> proper fix for it yet.
>
> Maybe you could delay the firmware load to when the device is opened (at
> which point you can probably change the driver to keep the device in PCI
> D3 state unless it is opened, which does save power), and just caching
> the firmware forever after the first load so that you don't need to
> request_firmware anything more than once.
>
> Chances are ipw2xxx firmware will never get a new revision anyway, so
> reloading the modules is not too large a price to pay if the user does
> decide he has to force a firmware refresh...

As far as I know there is no way to force firmware refresh at the
moment without reloading the driver. If you know any implementations
of such behavior, please let me know.

Stanislav.

> --
>  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
>  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
>  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
>  Henrique Holschuh

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Julian Calaby]

Hi Stanislav,

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 09:56, Stanislav Yakovlev
<stas.yakovlev@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Henrique,
>
> On 17 March 2012 07:36, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br> wrote:
>> Chances are ipw2xxx firmware will never get a new revision anyway, so
>> reloading the modules is not too large a price to pay if the user does
>> decide he has to force a firmware refresh...
>
> As far as I know there is no way to force firmware refresh at the
> moment without reloading the driver. If you know any implementations
> of such behavior, please let me know.

>From what I understand, this usually happens when something goes
horribly wrong and the only solution is to re-start the card from
scratch.

Reloading a module to do that isn't such a bad thing, but it would
arguably be better if it happened automatically. I believe that this
is one of the reset options for modern Intel cards.

Thanks,

-- 
Julian Calaby

Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/
.Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/

Re: MAINTAINER NEEDED -- Re: status of ipw2x00

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Stanislav Yakovlev wrote:
> Hello Henrique,
> On 17 March 2012 07:36, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br> wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Mar 2012, Stanislav Yakovlev wrote:
> >> On 15 March 2012 04:02, Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > Are you plan to fix issues caused on current firmware loading changes on
> >> > linux?
> >>
> >> I was able to reproduce this issue; unfortunately, I don't have a
> >> proper fix for it yet.
> >
> > Maybe you could delay the firmware load to when the device is opened (at
> > which point you can probably change the driver to keep the device in PCI
> > D3 state unless it is opened, which does save power), and just caching
> > the firmware forever after the first load so that you don't need to
> > request_firmware anything more than once.
> >
> > Chances are ipw2xxx firmware will never get a new revision anyway, so
> > reloading the modules is not too large a price to pay if the user does
> > decide he has to force a firmware refresh...
> 
> As far as I know there is no way to force firmware refresh at the
> moment without reloading the driver. If you know any implementations
> of such behavior, please let me know.

You just need to switch modes, which forces it to switch firmwares, and it
always reloads it from disk (unless you've built it in the kernel, maybe.  I
didn't try that).

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh