ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Daniel Drake]

Hi,

I'm interested in porting the ar5k driver to Linux after the recent SFLC
conclusions on the legal status. However, the hardware I have here
appears to be unsupported by ar5k:

01:04.0 0200: 168c:001a (rev 01)
        Subsystem: 168c:2052

01:04.0 Ethernet controller: Atheros Communications, Inc. AR5005G
802.11abg NIC (rev 01)
        Subsystem: Atheros Communications, Inc. Unknown device 2052
        Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 168, IRQ 66
        Memory at c0100000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]
        Capabilities: [44] Power Management version 2

It is a mini-PCI card.

Does anyone know how much work would be needed for the ar5k codebase to
support this hardware?

Thanks!
-- 
Daniel Drake
Brontes Technologies, A 3M Company


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV

Re: ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Michael Buesch]

On Tuesday 28 November 2006 21:39, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm interested in porting the ar5k driver to Linux after the recent SFLC
> conclusions on the legal status. However, the hardware I have here
> appears to be unsupported by ar5k:
> 
> 01:04.0 0200: 168c:001a (rev 01)
>         Subsystem: 168c:2052
> 
> 01:04.0 Ethernet controller: Atheros Communications, Inc. AR5005G
> 802.11abg NIC (rev 01)
>         Subsystem: Atheros Communications, Inc. Unknown device 2052
>         Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 168, IRQ 66
>         Memory at c0100000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]
>         Capabilities: [44] Power Management version 2
> 
> It is a mini-PCI card.
> 
> Does anyone know how much work would be needed for the ar5k codebase to
> support this hardware?

I started to port this at
http://bu3sch.de/ath/atheros.git/

I dunno how hard it is to add hw support.

-- 
Greetings Michael.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Nick Kossifidis]

I 've already ported ar5k to linux and it works with madwifi versions
before the bsd-head merge, you can see more infos here ->
http://madwifi.org/wiki/OpenHAL

If i can help in any way feel free to mail ;-)

Nick

2006/11/28, Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>:
> On Tuesday 28 November 2006 21:39, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm interested in porting the ar5k driver to Linux after the recent SFLC
> > conclusions on the legal status. However, the hardware I have here
> > appears to be unsupported by ar5k:
> >
> > 01:04.0 0200: 168c:001a (rev 01)
> >         Subsystem: 168c:2052
> >
> > 01:04.0 Ethernet controller: Atheros Communications, Inc. AR5005G
> > 802.11abg NIC (rev 01)
> >         Subsystem: Atheros Communications, Inc. Unknown device 2052
> >         Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 168, IRQ 66
> >         Memory at c0100000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]
> >         Capabilities: [44] Power Management version 2
> >
> > It is a mini-PCI card.
> >
> > Does anyone know how much work would be needed for the ar5k codebase to
> > support this hardware?
>
> I started to port this at
> http://bu3sch.de/ath/atheros.git/
>
> I dunno how hard it is to add hw support.
>
> --
> Greetings Michael.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Madwifi-devel mailing list
> Madwifi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/madwifi-devel
>

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Michael Buesch]

On Wednesday 29 November 2006 14:55, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> I 've already ported ar5k to linux and it works with madwifi versions

No, you misunderstood me.
Madwifi is not a native driver and will never be accepted into
mainline. My attempt is to write a native d80211 driver based
on the ar5k sources. Currently I don't have too much time, so
it's not very progressed, but from next week on I have vacation
from work, so I think I can work on this again.

-- 
Greetings Michael.

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Nick Kossifidis]

Good luck then ;-)

If anyone wants to help on making ar5k work with newer madwifi
versions and fix bugs etc (that 'll also help bsd ppl) plzz mail me.
We can make it better.

Nick
P.S. Why not work on dawifi ?

2006/11/29, Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>:
> On Wednesday 29 November 2006 14:55, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> > I 've already ported ar5k to linux and it works with madwifi versions
>
> No, you misunderstood me.
> Madwifi is not a native driver and will never be accepted into
> mainline. My attempt is to write a native d80211 driver based
> on the ar5k sources. Currently I don't have too much time, so
> it's not very progressed, but from next week on I have vacation
> from work, so I think I can work on this again.
>
> --
> Greetings Michael.
>

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Michael Buesch]

On Wednesday 29 November 2006 15:34, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> Good luck then ;-)
> 
> If anyone wants to help on making ar5k work with newer madwifi
> versions and fix bugs etc (that 'll also help bsd ppl) plzz mail me.
> We can make it better.
> 
> Nick
> P.S. Why not work on dawifi ?

Because it won't be merged mainline either.

-- 
Greetings Michael.

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Dan Williams]

On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 16:12 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 November 2006 15:34, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> > Good luck then ;-)
> > 
> > If anyone wants to help on making ar5k work with newer madwifi
> > versions and fix bugs etc (that 'll also help bsd ppl) plzz mail me.
> > We can make it better.
> > 
> > Nick
> > P.S. Why not work on dawifi ?
> 
> Because it won't be merged mainline either.

I thought dadwifi was supposed to replace net80211 with d80211 (but not
replace the binary HAL).  Aren't the two things complementary, or did
you just decide that starting from scratch would produce a less crufty,
better understood, better-d80211 integrated driver?

Dan

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[David Kimdon]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 04:12:33PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 November 2006 15:34, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> > Good luck then ;-)
> > 
> > If anyone wants to help on making ar5k work with newer madwifi
> > versions and fix bugs etc (that 'll also help bsd ppl) plzz mail me.
> > We can make it better.
> > 
> > Nick
> > P.S. Why not work on dawifi ?
> 
> Because it won't be merged mainline either.

Why do you say that?

There is absolutely no reason why dadwifi can't be merged into the
mainline once the hal issue is resolved. 

-David

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[David Kimdon]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 10:21:09AM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 16:12 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Wednesday 29 November 2006 15:34, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> > > Good luck then ;-)
> > > 
> > > If anyone wants to help on making ar5k work with newer madwifi
> > > versions and fix bugs etc (that 'll also help bsd ppl) plzz mail me.
> > > We can make it better.
> > > 
> > > Nick
> > > P.S. Why not work on dawifi ?
> > 
> > Because it won't be merged mainline either.
> 
> I thought dadwifi was supposed to replace net80211 with d80211 (but not
> replace the binary HAL). 

yes

>  Aren't the two things complementary, 

yes

> or did
> you just decide that starting from scratch would produce a less crufty,
> better understood, better-d80211 integrated driver?

well, dadwifi will be (is) well integrated with d80211.  As far as
cruft goes, I'd rather call it historical artifacts :-)  We are doing
our best to minimize cruft while standing on the shoulders of madwifi.

-David

> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Michael Buesch]

On Wednesday 29 November 2006 16:24, David Kimdon wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 04:12:33PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Wednesday 29 November 2006 15:34, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> > > Good luck then ;-)
> > > 
> > > If anyone wants to help on making ar5k work with newer madwifi
> > > versions and fix bugs etc (that 'll also help bsd ppl) plzz mail me.
> > > We can make it better.
> > > 
> > > Nick
> > > P.S. Why not work on dawifi ?
> > 
> > Because it won't be merged mainline either.
> 
> Why do you say that?
> 
> There is absolutely no reason why dadwifi can't be merged into the
> mainline once the hal issue is resolved. 

Last time we talked about that stuff, it was decided that
we don't want a HAL... See archives.

-- 
Greetings Michael.

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Michael Buesch]

On Wednesday 29 November 2006 16:24, David Kimdon wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 04:12:33PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Wednesday 29 November 2006 15:34, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> > > Good luck then ;-)
> > > 
> > > If anyone wants to help on making ar5k work with newer madwifi
> > > versions and fix bugs etc (that 'll also help bsd ppl) plzz mail me.
> > > We can make it better.
> > > 
> > > Nick
> > > P.S. Why not work on dawifi ?
> > 
> > Because it won't be merged mainline either.
> 
> Why do you say that?
> 
> There is absolutely no reason why dadwifi can't be merged into the
> mainline once the hal issue is resolved. 

Ok, I deleted my repository.
Atheros stuff is really too frustrating to work on and
I don't have the time anyway.
If you believe dadwifi can be merged, please _do_ so.

-- 
Greetings Michael.

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Daniel Drake]

On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 15:55 +0200, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> I 've already ported ar5k to linux and it works with madwifi versions
> before the bsd-head merge, you can see more infos here ->
> http://madwifi.org/wiki/OpenHAL
> 
> If i can help in any way feel free to mail ;-)

Thanks, I'm trying it out to see whether it works on my hardware. I
compiled and loaded everything OK, ath0 appears, but it doesn't seem to
be working.

I'm using these commands:

ifconfig ath0 up
iwlist ath0 scan

Should that produce scan results, or do I need to use some weird tools
to do that? (this is my first interaction with the madwifi-old driver)

Currently it pauses for a while and then doesn't present any results.

Thanks!

-- 
Daniel Drake
Brontes Technologies, A 3M Company

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Michael Renzmann]

Hi.

> On Wednesday 29 November 2006 16:24, David Kimdon wrote:
>> There is absolutely no reason why dadwifi can't be merged into the
>> mainline once the hal issue is resolved.
> Last time we talked about that stuff, it was decided that
> we don't want a HAL... See archives.

IIRC Pavel already explained that getting rid of the HAL per se should be
no problem - it could easily be dissolved into the driver, if that is one
of the requirements to be fulfilled before the driver (MadWifi or DadWifi)
is considered for mainline inclusion. As soon as there is source available
to dissolve, at least.

>From what I understood the "... once the hal issue is resolved" part of
David's mail refered to exactly that question.

Bye, Mike

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Michael Buesch]

On Wednesday 29 November 2006 16:58, Michael Renzmann wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> > On Wednesday 29 November 2006 16:24, David Kimdon wrote:
> >> There is absolutely no reason why dadwifi can't be merged into the
> >> mainline once the hal issue is resolved.
> > Last time we talked about that stuff, it was decided that
> > we don't want a HAL... See archives.
> 
> IIRC Pavel already explained that getting rid of the HAL per se should be
> no problem - it could easily be dissolved into the driver, if that is one
> of the requirements to be fulfilled before the driver (MadWifi or DadWifi)
> is considered for mainline inclusion. As soon as there is source available
> to dissolve, at least.

Ok, so who actually does the work?
It has been talked a lot about what could and what should be done.
But who does it?

> From what I understood the "... once the hal issue is resolved" part of
> David's mail refered to exactly that question.

Ok, I don't know what "The HAL Issue" (tm) is.
Sounds like a hollywood movie theme to me. ;)

-- 
Greetings Michael.

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[David Kimdon]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 04:38:56PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 November 2006 16:24, David Kimdon wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 04:12:33PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 29 November 2006 15:34, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> > Why do you say that?
> > 
> > There is absolutely no reason why dadwifi can't be merged into the
> > mainline once the hal issue is resolved. 
> 
> Last time we talked about that stuff, it was decided that
> we don't want a HAL... See archives.

To be clear, that is all part of the hal issue that needs to be
resolved.  Removing the hal abstraction is not difficult for an
interested party once source for the hal is available.  The next step
in such an effort would be to add an open hal to dadwifi, IMO.

-David

P.S. Actually, it isn't clear to me that removing the hal entirely is
a good idea.  Abstractions exist for practical reasons.  The hal
allows dadwifi to support a variety of Atheros chips without needing
to worry about the specific details of each chip.

Re: ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:03:28 -0800
David Kimdon <david.kimdon@devicescape.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 04:38:56PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Wednesday 29 November 2006 16:24, David Kimdon wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 04:12:33PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday 29 November 2006 15:34, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> > > Why do you say that?
> > > 
> > > There is absolutely no reason why dadwifi can't be merged into the
> > > mainline once the hal issue is resolved. 
> > 
> > Last time we talked about that stuff, it was decided that
> > we don't want a HAL... See archives.
> 
> To be clear, that is all part of the hal issue that needs to be
> resolved.  Removing the hal abstraction is not difficult for an
> interested party once source for the hal is available.  The next step
> in such an effort would be to add an open hal to dadwifi, IMO.
> 

Isn't it obvious. Planning from goal through intermediate steps gives:

0 - today (raw materials)
	* softmac stack: d80211
	* open hal: ar5k
	* glue layer: dadwifi

1- put pieces together
	* d80211 + dadwifi + ar5k

2 - release working code to d80211 tree

3 - hard link dad2ifi to ar5k (one module)

4 - collapse indirect calls and refactor

5 - lather rinse repeat in public d80211 tree

...

8 - resulting in atheros driver kernel module

9 - code ready in d80211


10 - mainline integration of working driver for Atheros
     using common softmac stack

> 
> P.S. Actually, it isn't clear to me that removing the hal entirely is
> a good idea.  Abstractions exist for practical reasons.  The hal
> allows dadwifi to support a variety of Atheros chips without needing
> to worry about the specific details of each chip.

Abstractions that deal with hardware are good. See phylib.
Abstractions that try to deal with operating system independence are 
gross.



-- 
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV

Re: ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Michael Renzmann]

Hi.

Michael Buesch wrote:
>> IIRC Pavel already explained that getting rid of the HAL per se should be
>> no problem - it could easily be dissolved into the driver, if that is one
>> of the requirements to be fulfilled before the driver (MadWifi or DadWifi)
>> is considered for mainline inclusion. As soon as there is source available
>> to dissolve, at least.
> Ok, so who actually does the work?

The MadWifi team? It won't happen today or tomorrow, but I'm confident 
that it will happen. Any contribution to that effort is highly welcome - 
the more people help, the faster will the goal be reached.

>> From what I understood the "... once the hal issue is resolved" part of
>> David's mail refered to exactly that question.
> Ok, I don't know what "The HAL Issue" (tm) is.

You referred to the archives where that exact "issue"(s) (binary-only, 
non-free, no sources, unwanted level of abstraction) has/have been 
discussed in lenght, but you claim you didn't have a clue what David was 
talking about? Come on.

Bye, Mike

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2971 bytes --]

On 11/29/06, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:03:28 -0800
> David Kimdon <david.kimdon@devicescape.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 04:38:56PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 29 November 2006 16:24, David Kimdon wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 04:12:33PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday 29 November 2006 15:34, Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> > > > Why do you say that?
> > > >
> > > > There is absolutely no reason why dadwifi can't be merged into the
> > > > mainline once the hal issue is resolved.
> > >
> > > Last time we talked about that stuff, it was decided that
> > > we don't want a HAL... See archives.
> >
> > To be clear, that is all part of the hal issue that needs to be
> > resolved.  Removing the hal abstraction is not difficult for an
> > interested party once source for the hal is available.  The next step
> > in such an effort would be to add an open hal to dadwifi, IMO.
> >
>
> Isn't it obvious. Planning from goal through intermediate steps gives:
>
> 0 - today (raw materials)
>         * softmac stack: d80211
>         * open hal: ar5k
>         * glue layer: dadwifi
>
> 1- put pieces together
>         * d80211 + dadwifi + ar5k

The problem actually is that ar5k port to Linux Nick wrote currently
only works with an older version of madwifi (svn 1142) which itself
needs some patching and that dadwifi is based on the latest and
greatest madwifi source base. So a d80211 + dadwifi + ar5k will only
work if Nick's ar5k port is extended to support the latest
madwifi/dadwifi. I haven't had time yet to determine the exact
requirements on Nick's ported openhal to work with dadwifi but that
should be our focus for now in parallel with completing dadwifi.

For those curious the attached patch fixes madwifi 1142 release for
use with kernels >= 2.6.18-rc1. Add Nick's ar5k port to linux and
you'll have a Free driver ready. Since I see the mb's openhal git
repos is down here is a link for it as I checked it out on 2006-08-03:

http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/mcgrof/openhal-2006-08-03.tar.gz

(give it sometime to sync)

To make things easier for development I'd like to suggest a few madwif
ibranches created:

* madwifi-1152-openhal: based on madwifi-1152, patched with my patch,
added openhal, old hal removed. Working free solution. Should exist
just as a reference and to allow users to checkout a working free
alternative in the mean time.

* madwifi-dadwifi-openal: based on the latest dadwifi with the
openhal, old hal removed. As dadwifi gets updated you can pull updates
to this branch. As the openhal advances you can make updates to the
openhal here.

Once we get dadwifi+openhal branch working I believe it should become
the trunk of madwifi.

Lastly, if anyone needs access to atheros hardware for development of
this driver or the openhal please let me know and you will get access
to a lot of nodes for development.

  Luis

[-- Attachment #2: madwifi-1142-fixed-2.6.18-rc1.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1735 bytes --]

diff -Naurp madwifi-openhal/ath/if_ath.c madwifi-openhal-fixed/ath/if_ath.c
--- madwifi-openhal/ath/if_ath.c	2005-06-24 06:41:22.000000000 -0400
+++ madwifi-openhal-fixed/ath/if_ath.c	2006-08-04 14:49:38.000000000 -0400
@@ -245,13 +245,20 @@ enum {
 #endif
 
 static	int countrycode = -1;
-MODULE_PARM(countrycode, "i");
-MODULE_PARM_DESC(countrycode, "Override default country code");
 static	int outdoor = -1;
-MODULE_PARM(outdoor, "i");
-MODULE_PARM_DESC(outdoor, "Enable/disable outdoor use");
 static	int xchanmode = -1;
+#if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(2,5,52))
+MODULE_PARM(countrycode, "i");
+MODULE_PARM(outdoor, "i");
 MODULE_PARM(xchanmode, "i");
+#else
+#include <linux/moduleparam.h>
+module_param(countrycode, int, 0);
+module_param(outdoor, int, 0);
+module_param(xchanmode, int, 0);
+#endif
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(countrycode, "Override default country code");
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(outdoor, "Enable/disable outdoor use");
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(xchanmode, "Enable/disable extended channel mode");
 
 int
diff -Naurp madwifi-openhal/openhal/ar5xxx.h madwifi-openhal-fixed/openhal/ar5xxx.h
--- madwifi-openhal/openhal/ar5xxx.h	2006-08-03 15:24:30.000000000 -0400
+++ madwifi-openhal-fixed/openhal/ar5xxx.h	2006-08-04 14:42:37.000000000 -0400
@@ -1425,7 +1425,7 @@ struct ar5k_srev_name {
 	{ "5111",	AR5K_VERSION_RAD,	AR5K_SREV_RAD_5111 },	\
 	{ "2111",	AR5K_VERSION_RAD,	AR5K_SREV_RAD_2111 },	\
 	{ "5112",	AR5K_VERSION_RAD,	AR5K_SREV_RAD_5112 },	\
-	{ "5112a",	AR5K_VERSION_RAD,	AR5K_SREV_RAD_5112A },	\ 
+	{ "5112a",	AR5K_VERSION_RAD,	AR5K_SREV_RAD_5112A },	\
 	{ "2112",	AR5K_VERSION_RAD,	AR5K_SREV_RAD_2112 },	\
 	{ "2112a",	AR5K_VERSION_RAD,	AR5K_SREV_RAD_2112A },	\
 	{ "xxxx",	AR5K_VERSION_RAD,	AR5K_SREV_UNKNOWN }	\

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On 12/1/06, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@gmail.com> wrote:

> * madwifi-1152-openhal: based on madwifi-1152, patched with my patch,
> added openhal, old hal removed. Working free solution. Should exist
> just as a reference and to allow users to checkout a working free
> alternative in the mean time.

typo meant 1142

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Michael Renzmann]

Hi all.

> To make things easier for development I'd like to suggest a few madwif
> ibranches created:
>
> * madwifi-1152-openhal: based on madwifi-1152, patched with my patch,
> added openhal, old hal removed. Working free solution. Should exist
> just as a reference and to allow users to checkout a working free
> alternative in the mean time.
>
> * madwifi-dadwifi-openal: based on the latest dadwifi with the
> openhal, old hal removed. As dadwifi gets updated you can pull updates
> to this branch. As the openhal advances you can make updates to the
> openhal here.

I've set up the suggested branches, with slight changing to the proposed
names:

* http://svn.madwifi.org/branches/madwifi-old-openhal (based on r1142)
* http://svn.madwifi.org/branches/dadwifi-openhal (based on r1827)

Neither of them has received any modifications yet, they are basically
copies of the mentioned revisions. I'm currently lacking the time to
import Nick's work into the madwifi-old-openhal branch, for example - it
would be nice if someone else could work on that.

The MadWifi project happily provides any interested party access to the
resources we have at hands - including (but not limited to) r/w access to
the repository, an account for our Trac (used to manage tickets for bugs,
patches, ...), e-mail, .... Let me know if you need something in that
regard and I'll try to get it done. We'd love to support these efforts
where possible.

Bye, Mike

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On 12/5/06, Michael Renzmann <madwifi@nospam.otaku42.de> wrote:
 openhal here.
>
> I've set up the suggested branches, with slight changing to the proposed
> names:
>
> * http://svn.madwifi.org/branches/madwifi-old-openhal (based on r1142)
> * http://svn.madwifi.org/branches/dadwifi-openhal (based on r1827)
>
> Neither of them has received any modifications yet, they are basically
> copies of the mentioned revisions. I'm currently lacking the time to
> import Nick's work into the madwifi-old-openhal branch, for example - it
> would be nice if someone else could work on that.

CC'ing Reyk Foeter.

Committed Nick's port of ar5k (openal) to both branches, both now have
the openhal. Please note (very important):

We are basing our openhal on OpenBSD's ar5k. Because of this and since
the GPL does not allow us to commit changes on the GPL version back to
the BSD version please sumbit your non-linux enhancements to the HAL
to "Reyk Floeter" <reyk@openbsd.org> and CC madwifi-devel.

We have an openhal.org which we can start to use, should Reyk want, to
use as the master tree of the ar5k to make sure any enhancements on
the HAL go to both BSD and Linux. The licensing on the master tree
should be kept BSD as Reyk wants it to be. This way Linux or BSD
contributions can go into one tree and later revisions can be added to
dadwifi/openbsd with their own specific BSD'isms and Linux'isms. Keep
in mind the Linux port will remain dual licensed BSD/GPL. Let me know
what you think Reyk.

  Luis

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 10:15:33 -0500
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 12/5/06, Michael Renzmann <madwifi@nospam.otaku42.de> wrote:
>  openhal here.
> >
> > I've set up the suggested branches, with slight changing to the proposed
> > names:
> >
> > * http://svn.madwifi.org/branches/madwifi-old-openhal (based on r1142)
> > * http://svn.madwifi.org/branches/dadwifi-openhal (based on r1827)
> >
> > Neither of them has received any modifications yet, they are basically
> > copies of the mentioned revisions. I'm currently lacking the time to
> > import Nick's work into the madwifi-old-openhal branch, for example - it
> > would be nice if someone else could work on that.
> 
> CC'ing Reyk Foeter.
> 
> Committed Nick's port of ar5k (openal) to both branches, both now have
> the openhal. Please note (very important):
> 
> We are basing our openhal on OpenBSD's ar5k. Because of this and since
> the GPL does not allow us to commit changes on the GPL version back to
> the BSD version please sumbit your non-linux enhancements to the HAL
> to "Reyk Floeter" <reyk@openbsd.org> and CC madwifi-devel.
> 
> We have an openhal.org which we can start to use, should Reyk want, to
> use as the master tree of the ar5k to make sure any enhancements on
> the HAL go to both BSD and Linux. The licensing on the master tree
> should be kept BSD as Reyk wants it to be. This way Linux or BSD
> contributions can go into one tree and later revisions can be added to
> dadwifi/openbsd with their own specific BSD'isms and Linux'isms. Keep
> in mind the Linux port will remain dual licensed BSD/GPL. Let me know
> what you think Reyk.
> 
>   Luis

All the more reason to merge the HAL in and make it disappear

-- 
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>

Re: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On 12/5/06, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 10:15:33 -0500
> "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 12/5/06, Michael Renzmann <madwifi@nospam.otaku42.de> wrote:
> >  openhal here.
> > >
> > > I've set up the suggested branches, with slight changing to the proposed
> > > names:
> > >
> > > * http://svn.madwifi.org/branches/madwifi-old-openhal (based on r1142)
> > > * http://svn.madwifi.org/branches/dadwifi-openhal (based on r1827)
> > >
> > > Neither of them has received any modifications yet, they are basically
> > > copies of the mentioned revisions. I'm currently lacking the time to
> > > import Nick's work into the madwifi-old-openhal branch, for example - it
> > > would be nice if someone else could work on that.
> >
> > CC'ing Reyk Foeter.
> >
> > Committed Nick's port of ar5k (openal) to both branches, both now have
> > the openhal. Please note (very important):
> >
> > We are basing our openhal on OpenBSD's ar5k. Because of this and since
> > the GPL does not allow us to commit changes on the GPL version back to
> > the BSD version please sumbit your non-linux enhancements to the HAL
> > to "Reyk Floeter" <reyk@openbsd.org> and CC madwifi-devel.
> >
> > We have an openhal.org which we can start to use, should Reyk want, to
> > use as the master tree of the ar5k to make sure any enhancements on
> > the HAL go to both BSD and Linux. The licensing on the master tree
> > should be kept BSD as Reyk wants it to be. This way Linux or BSD
> > contributions can go into one tree and later revisions can be added to
> > dadwifi/openbsd with their own specific BSD'isms and Linux'isms. Keep
> > in mind the Linux port will remain dual licensed BSD/GPL. Let me know
> > what you think Reyk.
> >
> >   Luis
>
> All the more reason to merge the HAL in and make it disappear

Agreed in the long term -- but this should not happen immediately as
otherwise we'd only get a completely free driver by the time this
hardware is outdated and reached its end of life. For now I'd say lets
stick to dadwifi+openhal effort, analyze net80211 from the ground up
and port to devicescape any features we are currently lacking. I can
help work on this fulltime.

  Luis