monitor_during_oper on rt*pci (or any other pcmcia card)?

monitor_during_oper on rt*pci (or any other pcmcia card)?

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 734 bytes --]

Hey,

Florian approached me with a project where you need a pcmcia card that
can have monitor_during_oper. I'd use bcm43xx but unfortunately the
signal strength calculations are way off right now, and that's another
requirement.

Can the rt family of cards be made to support this with reliable signal
strength readings?

Or maybe I should rephrase the questions: which pcmcia cards can support
this in their hardware? I might be willing to port their drivers over to
d80211 just to get some more familiarity with the stack...

Now, if no one can point me to ones that do have working signal
strength, I'll probably have to do more reverse engineering on bcm43xx
to get some reliable readings :/

Thanks,
johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 793 bytes --]

Re: monitor_during_oper on rt*pci (or any other pcmcia card)?

[Ivo van Doorn]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1159 bytes --]

Hi,

> Florian approached me with a project where you need a pcmcia card that
> can have monitor_during_oper. I'd use bcm43xx but unfortunately the
> signal strength calculations are way off right now, and that's another
> requirement.
> 
> Can the rt family of cards be made to support this with reliable signal
> strength readings?

At this moment the rt2x00 drivers are not known for their correct signal
strength reporting. The reading is coming out of the registers but
it isn't working in all cases.
Even the legacy drivers from Ralink self are not known for their correct
behaviour but some issues around that have been traced to bugs in the
driver. But it could be possible the registers are wrong as well.

> Or maybe I should rephrase the questions: which pcmcia cards can support
> this in their hardware? I might be willing to port their drivers over to
> d80211 just to get some more familiarity with the stack...
> 
> Now, if no one can point me to ones that do have working signal
> strength, I'll probably have to do more reverse engineering on bcm43xx
> to get some reliable readings :/
> 
> Thanks,
> johannes
> 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]