ipw2100 wireless driver

ipw2100 wireless driver

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

What is the status of ipw2100? Is there chance that it would be pushed
into mainline?

I have few problems with that:

* it will not compile with gcc-2.95. Attached patch fixes one problem
but more remain.

--- ipw2100-ofic/ieee80211.h	2004-07-09 06:32:17.000000000 +0200
+++ ipw2100-0.49/ieee80211.h	2004-07-14 13:18:50.000000000 +0200
@@ -440,7 +440,7 @@
 	u16 reserved;
 	u16 frag_size;
 	u16 payload_size;
-	struct sk_buff *fragments[];
+	struct sk_buff *fragments[1];
 };
 
 extern struct ieee80211_txb *ieee80211_skb_to_txb(struct ieee80211_device *ieee, 

* it requires CONFIG_CRYPTO, but fails to force it in Kconfig.

									Pavel
-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Jeff Chua]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Pavel Machek wrote:

> Hi!
>
> What is the status of ipw2100? Is there chance that it would be pushed
> into mainline?
>
> I have few problems with that:
>
> * it will not compile with gcc-2.95. Attached patch fixes one problem
> but more remain.

I've given up hope on that. Don't think it'll ever compile on 2.95. I'm 
using ndiswrapper and it works nicely.

Jeff.

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> >What is the status of ipw2100? Is there chance that it would be pushed
> >into mainline?
> >
> >I have few problems with that:
> >
> >* it will not compile with gcc-2.95. Attached patch fixes one problem
> >but more remain.
> 
> I've given up hope on that. Don't think it'll ever compile on 2.95. I'm 
> using ndiswrapper and it works nicely.

No, I think that can be fixed... I'll rather fix ipw2100 than use
ndiswrapper.

								Pavel
-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Tomas Szepe]

On Jul-14 2004, Wed, 13:55 +0200
Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> wrote:

> > >What is the status of ipw2100? Is there chance that it would be pushed
> > >into mainline?
> > >
> > >I have few problems with that:
> > >
> > >* it will not compile with gcc-2.95. Attached patch fixes one problem
> > >but more remain.
> > 
> > I've given up hope on that. Don't think it'll ever compile on 2.95. I'm 
> > using ndiswrapper and it works nicely.
> 
> No, I think that can be fixed... I'll rather fix ipw2100 than use
> ndiswrapper.

ipw2100 0.51 from ipw2100.sf.net builds using gcc-2.95.3 "out of the box."
Also make sure to use the attached patch for 2.6.8pre.

-- 
Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com>


diff -urN linux-2.6.7/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100/ipw2100_fw.c linux-2.6.7.x/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100/ipw2100_fw.c
--- linux-2.6.7/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100/ipw2100_fw.c	2004-08-09 21:37:11.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.7.x/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100/ipw2100_fw.c	2004-08-09 21:36:15.000000000 +0200
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@
 			goto fail;
 			
 		}
-		if (read(fd, c->buf, c->len) != c->len) {
+		if (sys_read(fd, c->buf, c->len) != c->len) {
 			printk(KERN_INFO "Failed to read chunk firmware "
 			       "chunk %d.\n", i);
 			goto fail;
@@ -231,17 +231,17 @@
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fw->fw.chunk_list);
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fw->uc.chunk_list);
 	
-	fd = open(fn, 0, 0);
+	fd = sys_open(fn, 0, 0);
 	if (fd == -1) {
 		printk(KERN_INFO "Unable to load '%s'.\n", fn);
 		return 1;
 	}
-	l = lseek(fd, 0L, 2);
-	lseek(fd, 0L, 0);
+	l = sys_lseek(fd, 0L, 2);
+	sys_lseek(fd, 0L, 0);
 	
 	IPW2100_DEBUG_FW("Loading %ld bytes for firmware '%s'\n", l, fn);
 	
-	if (read(fd, (char *)&h, sizeof(h)) != sizeof(h)) {
+	if (sys_read(fd, (char *)&h, sizeof(h)) != sizeof(h)) {
 		printk(KERN_INFO "Failed to read '%s'.\n", fn);
 		goto fail;
 	}
@@ -262,12 +262,12 @@
 	if (ipw2100_fw_load(fd, &fw->uc, h.uc_size))
 		goto fail;
 
-	close(fd);
+	sys_close(fd);
 	return 0;
 
  fail:
 	ipw2100_fw_free(fw);
-	close(fd);
+	sys_close(fd);
 	return 1;
 }
 

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Jeff Chua]

On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, Tomas Szepe wrote:

> ipw2100 0.51 from ipw2100.sf.net builds using gcc-2.95.3 "out of the box."

Well, this is really good news!

I just downloaded 0.51 compiled with gcc-2.95.3 and got it working on my 
IBM X31 with WEP. Even better, 0.51 doesn't need hostap-driver.

Looks good.

Thanks,
Jeff

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 01:02:07PM +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, Tomas Szepe wrote:
> 
> > ipw2100 0.51 from ipw2100.sf.net builds using gcc-2.95.3 "out of the box."
> 
> Well, this is really good news!
> 
> I just downloaded 0.51 compiled with gcc-2.95.3 and got it working on my 
> IBM X31 with WEP. Even better, 0.51 doesn't need hostap-driver.

Btw, any vounteer for merging the hostap-based generic ieee80211_* files
from the ipw2100 driver with the hostap driver in the wireless-2.6 tree?

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > ipw2100 0.51 from ipw2100.sf.net builds using gcc-2.95.3 "out of the box."
> > 
> > Well, this is really good news!
> > 
> > I just downloaded 0.51 compiled with gcc-2.95.3 and got it working on my 
> > IBM X31 with WEP. Even better, 0.51 doesn't need hostap-driver.
> 
> Btw, any vounteer for merging the hostap-based generic ieee80211_* files
> from the ipw2100 driver with the hostap driver in the wireless-2.6 tree?

I know very little about wireless-2.6 tree (where to get it without
bitkeeper?), but...

task is to take ipw2100 driver, drop ieee80211_* files from it, and
make it work with ieee80211* files from wireless-2.6?

								Pavel
-- 
Horseback riding is like software...
...vgf orggre jura vgf serr.

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 12:16:40PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> I know very little about wireless-2.6 tree (where to get it without
> bitkeeper?), but...

http://gkernel.bkbits.net:8080/wireless-2.6 it the bkweb interface, that's
the only thing I've looked at myself so far.

> task is to take ipw2100 driver, drop ieee80211_* files from it, and
> make it work with ieee80211* files from wireless-2.6?

there's no ieee80211_* files in the wireless-2.6 tree, the code is part
of hostap_*

and btw, I think hostap_* is the wrong name for the prism-specific files,
too.  I'd rather call those prism2_* or something.

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > I know very little about wireless-2.6 tree (where to get it without
> > bitkeeper?), but...
> 
> http://gkernel.bkbits.net:8080/wireless-2.6 it the bkweb interface, that's
> the only thing I've looked at myself so far.

Hmm, strange, one merge in last 8 weeks. That's not too active
project. Are you sure this is the right tree to work against?

Are there plain diffs somewhere?
								Pavel
-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Jeff Garzik]

Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hmm, strange, one merge in last 8 weeks. That's not too active
> project. Are you sure this is the right tree to work against?


It's the right tree, but wireless development hasn't coalesced yet on 
that tree it appears.  It sounds like the Intel folks are interested in 
working on that tree, and others have mentioned they are interested as well.

Waiting for people step up, and put their code where their mouth is...

	Jeff

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> >Hmm, strange, one merge in last 8 weeks. That's not too active
> >project. Are you sure this is the right tree to work against?
> 
> 
> It's the right tree, but wireless development hasn't coalesced yet on 
> that tree it appears.  It sounds like the Intel folks are interested 
> in working on that tree, and others have mentioned they are 
> interested as well.

Is there way to access that tree without bk? Daily patches maybe?
-- 
64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms         

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Jeff Garzik]

Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> 
>>>Hmm, strange, one merge in last 8 weeks. That's not too active
>>>project. Are you sure this is the right tree to work against?
>>
>>
>>It's the right tree, but wireless development hasn't coalesced yet on 
>>that tree it appears.  It sounds like the Intel folks are interested 
>>in working on that tree, and others have mentioned they are 
>>interested as well.
> 
> 
> Is there way to access that tree without bk? Daily patches maybe?

Just posted to netdev.  No regular snapshots, though.

	Jeff

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[James Ketrenos]

Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
>>>>ipw2100 0.51 from ipw2100.sf.net builds using gcc-2.95.3 "out of the box."
>>>
>>>Well, this is really good news!
>>>
>>>I just downloaded 0.51 compiled with gcc-2.95.3 and got it working on my 
>>>IBM X31 with WEP. Even better, 0.51 doesn't need hostap-driver.
>>
>>Btw, any vounteer for merging the hostap-based generic ieee80211_* files
>>from the ipw2100 driver with the hostap driver in the wireless-2.6 tree?
> 
> I know very little about wireless-2.6 tree (where to get it without
> bitkeeper?), but...
> 
> task is to take ipw2100 driver, drop ieee80211_* files from it, and
> make it work with ieee80211* files from wireless-2.6?

The ieee80211_* files in the ipw2100 were partially based on the hostap source, 
with any HW specific code pulled out.  It handles Tx and Rx right now for BSS, 
IBSS, and MONITOR mode, supporting wep, etc. It doesn't have all the hooks 
needed for the host based AP mode that Host AP currently has, nor does it 
support wpa yet.

We're also using the stack for the ipw2200 project (which we hope to get another 
snapshot release out soon)  We've been talking about pulling ieee80211 into its 
own project as others have expressed an interest in using it in their drivers as 
well.

The general goal for the ieee80211 stack has been to be able to take an skb from 
the xmit handler, fragment and encrypt that skb, and provide that list of those 
802.11 fragments to the driver for transmission.  On the Rx side, the ieee80211 
stack expects a standard 802.11 data frame which it then performs any decrypt / 
defrag and then passes up to the kernel.

Additional frame code is slowly being added to ieee80211 to support handling of 
probe response / beacons to manage scan results, etc. and provide default WE 
handlers for exposing that information.

ieee80211_wx provides some generic implementation for the WE handlers that every 
driver has to implement the same way.

We're currently working to clean up ipw2100 and ieee80211 code for submission to 
netdev for discussion and hopefully inclusion in the future.  The ieee80211 code 
is still being heavily developed, but its usable.  If anyone wants to help out, 
or if folks feel its ready as-is to get pulled into wireless-2.6, let me know.

Thanks,
James

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 05:16:35AM -0500, James Ketrenos wrote:
> We're currently working to clean up ipw2100 and ieee80211 code for submission to 
> netdev for discussion and hopefully inclusion in the future.  The ieee80211 code 
> is still being heavily developed, but its usable.  If anyone wants to help out, 
> or if folks feel its ready as-is to get pulled into wireless-2.6, let me know.

Maybe we should switch to your ieee802.11 for a generic wireless stack then
instead of the original hostap code.  At least it seems more actively
maintained right now and supports two drivers already.

Btw, I've looked at the ipw2100 and have to concerns regarding the firmware,

 a) yo'ure not using the proper firmware loader but some horrible
    handcrafted code using sys_open/sys_read & co that's not namespace
    safe at all
 b) the firmware has an extremly complicated and hard to comply with license,
    I'm not sure we want a driver that can't work without a so strangely
    licensed blob in the kernel. Can you talk to intel lawyers and put it on
    simple redristribution and binary modification for allowed for all purposes
    license please?
    

 
> Thanks,
> James
> 
> 
> 
---end quoted text---

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Wichert Akkerman]

Previously Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>  a) yo'ure not using the proper firmware loader but some horrible
>     handcrafted code using sys_open/sys_read & co that's not namespace
>     safe at all

It can use standard hotplug firmware load as well.

Wichert.

-- 
Wichert Akkerman <wichert@wiggy.net>    It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/                   It is hard to make things simple.

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 12:53:38PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >  a) yo'ure not using the proper firmware loader but some horrible
> >     handcrafted code using sys_open/sys_read & co that's not namespace
> >     safe at all
> 
> It can use standard hotplug firmware load as well.

Okay, I'll take that back.

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[James Ketrenos]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 05:16:35AM -0500, James Ketrenos wrote:
> 
>>We're currently working to clean up ipw2100 and ieee80211 code for submission to 
>>netdev for discussion and hopefully inclusion in the future.  The ieee80211 code 
>>is still being heavily developed, but its usable.  If anyone wants to help out, 
>>or if folks feel its ready as-is to get pulled into wireless-2.6, let me know.
> 
> Maybe we should switch to your ieee802.11 for a generic wireless stack then
> instead of the original hostap code.  At least it seems more actively
> maintained right now and supports two drivers already.

This would be ideal for those working on the projects using that stack.  If 
others agree I'll put together patches that introduce the ieee80211* module into 
wireless-2.6 once I get the next driver snapshots out for ipw2100 and ipw2200.

> Btw, I've looked at the ipw2100 and have to concerns regarding the firmware,
> 
>  a) yo'ure not using the proper firmware loader but some horrible
>     handcrafted code using sys_open/sys_read & co that's not namespace
>     safe at all

The driver supports (and defaults to) using firmware_class for loading the 
firmware.  The driver also supports a legacy loading approach for folks that 
have problems with using hotplug to load the firmware (which represents a fair 
number of users).

>  b) the firmware has an extremly complicated and hard to comply with license,
>     I'm not sure we want a driver that can't work without a so strangely
>     licensed blob in the kernel. Can you talk to intel lawyers and put it on
>     simple redristribution and binary modification for allowed for all purposes
>     license please?

The firmware license supports redistribution, and complying with the license 
shouldn't be too hard (I agree it may not be worded the most clearly, but few 
legal documents are).  If you have issues or questions about specific terms 
please email me offlist and I can try and address them.

Just to re-answer some others may be wondering regarding the firmware:

1) the firmware does not use nor is it dependent (at all) on the kernel.  no 
part of the firmware executes on the host CPU.
2) the firmware is loaded from disk vs. having to have non-volatile storage on 
the NIC and requiring a firmware flashing utility, etc.
3) the firmware, as per its license, can be redistributed by OSDs, ISVs, etc.

Thanks,
James

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Stephen Hemminger]

> The driver supports (and defaults to) using firmware_class for loading the 
> firmware.  The driver also supports a legacy loading approach for folks that 
> have problems with using hotplug to load the firmware (which represents a fair 
> number of users).
> 

When and if you submit it into mainline, please remove the legacy loading
approach. Let's get to the cause of the problem and fix it, not bandaid
around it.

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Tomas Szepe]

On Aug-11 2004, Wed, 09:30 -0700
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org> wrote:

> > The driver supports (and defaults to) using firmware_class for loading the 
> > firmware.  The driver also supports a legacy loading approach for folks that 
> > have problems with using hotplug to load the firmware (which represents a fair 
> > number of users).
> When and if you submit it into mainline, please remove the legacy loading
> approach. Let's get to the cause of the problem and fix it, not bandaid
> around it.

Or better yet, let's not!

There are many people who don't want to mess around with hotplug just
to get a single driver to load.

-- 
Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com>

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 06:33:33PM +0200, Tomas Szepe wrote:
> There are many people who don't want to mess around with hotplug just
> to get a single driver to load.

Then use a distribution that gets it right for you.  Having gazillions
of diffferent firmware loaders just because people are too lazy to set
up the canonical one isn't where we want to go.

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Tomas Szepe]

On Aug-11 2004, Wed, 17:51 +0100
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 06:33:33PM +0200, Tomas Szepe wrote:
> > There are many people who don't want to mess around with hotplug just
> > to get a single driver to load.
> 
> Then use a distribution that gets it right for you.  Having gazillions
> of diffferent firmware loaders just because people are too lazy to set
> up the canonical one isn't where we want to go.

Agreed.  But the point is, in the actual case of ipw2100, will the removal
of 40 or so lines of code justify killing the functionality for those (lots)
that use it?  I don't think so.  A nice /* duplicate this in another driver
and die */ comment in the right place will do the job just fine IMHO.

-- 
Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com>

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 07:02:08PM +0200, Tomas Szepe wrote:
> Agreed.  But the point is, in the actual case of ipw2100, will the removal
> of 40 or so lines of code justify killing the functionality for those (lots)
> that use it?

Yes.

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Tomas Szepe]

On Aug-11 2004, Wed, 18:11 +0100
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 07:02:08PM +0200, Tomas Szepe wrote:
> > Agreed.  But the point is, in the actual case of ipw2100, will the removal
> > of 40 or so lines of code justify killing the functionality for those (lots)
> > that use it?
> 
> Yes.

Well, "I'm not young enough to know everything."  Too bad.

And btw, mails to hch@infradead.org bounce.

-- 
Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com>

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[John Stoffel]

Tomas> On Aug-11 2004, Wed, 17:51 +0100
Tomas> Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:

>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 06:33:33PM +0200, Tomas Szepe wrote:
>> > There are many people who don't want to mess around with hotplug just
>> > to get a single driver to load.
>> 
>> Then use a distribution that gets it right for you.  Having gazillions
>> of diffferent firmware loaders just because people are too lazy to set
>> up the canonical one isn't where we want to go.

Tomas> Agreed.  But the point is, in the actual case of ipw2100, will
Tomas> the removal of 40 or so lines of code justify killing the
Tomas> functionality for those (lots) that use it?  I don't think so.

You can't have your cake and eat it too Tomas!  You agree that having
multiple firmware loaders in the kernel is bad, yet you still want to
have your own special one in there?  What's so difficult about setting
up hotplug for this purpose anyway?

John

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Jeff Chua]

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004, Tomas Szepe wrote:

> Or better yet, let's not!
>
> There are many people who don't want to mess around with hotplug just
> to get a single driver to load.

Agreed. Please leave the legacy-loader in there. I don't need hotplug 
scripts just to load a single firmware on my X31.

Thanks,
Jeff

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 11:21:34AM -0500, James Ketrenos wrote:
> Just to re-answer some others may be wondering regarding the firmware:

<-- 1 and 2 and -->

> 3) the firmware, as per its license, can be redistributed by OSDs, ISVs, 
> etc.

Would it be possible to get a better licensing for the firmware, ie one that 
would allow free redistribution, and be transferable?

	Luis

-- 
GnuPG Key fingerprint = 113F B290 C6D2 0251 4D84  A34A 6ADD 4937 E20A 525E

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Jeff Garzik]

James Ketrenos wrote:
> We're currently working to clean up ipw2100 and ieee80211 code for 
> submission to netdev for discussion and hopefully inclusion in the 
> future.  The ieee80211 code is still being heavily developed, but its 
> usable.  If anyone wants to help out, or if folks feel its ready as-is 
> to get pulled into wireless-2.6, let me know.


Well, wireless-2.6 is a development tree, so I would rather things land 
there sooner rather than later.

Everybody needs to be developing "on the same page".

	Jeff

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Tomas Szepe]

On Jul-14 2004, Wed, 19:48 +0800
Jeff Chua <jeffchua@silk.corp.fedex.com> wrote:

> >I have few problems with that:
> >
> >* it will not compile with gcc-2.95. Attached patch fixes one problem
> >but more remain.
> 
> I've given up hope on that. Don't think it'll ever compile on 2.95. I'm 
> using ndiswrapper and it works nicely.

I'd rather fiddle around with gcc versions than risk stack overflows
from running Windows drivers in Linux kernel space.

-- 
Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com>

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> What is the status of ipw2100? Is there chance that it would be pushed
> into mainline?

Hmm, it has very "nice" interface in proc, where it tells you (in
english *sentences*) if radio kill switch is enabled or not. Ouch.

iwconfig eth1 mode ad-hoc

followed by

iwconfig eth1

makes it crash in ipw2100_wx_get_power called from
wireless_process_ioctl.

								Pavel
-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Vojtech Pavlik]

On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 01:41:35PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> What is the status of ipw2100? Is there chance that it would be pushed
> into mainline?
> 
> I have few problems with that:
> 
> * it will not compile with gcc-2.95. Attached patch fixes one problem
> but more remain.

Wouldn't "struct sk_buff **fragments" be a more correct fix?

> --- ipw2100-ofic/ieee80211.h	2004-07-09 06:32:17.000000000 +0200
> +++ ipw2100-0.49/ieee80211.h	2004-07-14 13:18:50.000000000 +0200
> @@ -440,7 +440,7 @@
>  	u16 reserved;
>  	u16 frag_size;
>  	u16 payload_size;
> -	struct sk_buff *fragments[];
> +	struct sk_buff *fragments[1];
>  };
>  
>  extern struct ieee80211_txb *ieee80211_skb_to_txb(struct ieee80211_device *ieee, 
> 
> * it requires CONFIG_CRYPTO, but fails to force it in Kconfig.
> 
> 									Pavel
> -- 
> People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
> ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs, SuSE CR

Re: ipw2100 wireless driver

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > What is the status of ipw2100? Is there chance that it would be pushed
> > into mainline?
> > 
> > I have few problems with that:
> > 
> > * it will not compile with gcc-2.95. Attached patch fixes one problem
> > but more remain.
> 
> Wouldn't "struct sk_buff **fragments" be a more correct fix?

Yep, that would certainly be better. I'll wait if I get some  reply
from ipw2100 people. If so I'll update the patch.
								Pavel
-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!