Thread: [Madwifi-devel] ar5k and Atheros AR5005G
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
otaku
From: Daniel D. <dd...@br...> - 2006-11-28 20:39:22
|
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 |
From: Michael B. <mb...@bu...> - 2006-11-28 20:47:47
|
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. |
From: Nick K. <mic...@gm...> - 2006-11-29 13:55:52
|
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...@bu...>: > 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 > Mad...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/madwifi-devel > |
From: Daniel D. <dd...@br...> - 2006-11-29 15:56:34
|
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 |
From: Michael B. <mb...@bu...> - 2006-11-29 14:08:19
|
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. |
From: Nick K. <mic...@gm...> - 2006-11-29 14:35:01
|
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...@bu...>: > 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. > |
From: Michael B. <mb...@bu...> - 2006-11-29 15:12:47
|
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. |
From: David K. <dav...@de...> - 2006-11-29 15:24:40
|
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 |
From: Michael B. <mb...@bu...> - 2006-11-29 15:39:26
|
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. |
From: David K. <dav...@de...> - 2006-11-29 16:04:10
|
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. |
From: Stephen H. <she...@os...> - 2006-11-29 20:14:40
|
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:03:28 -0800 David Kimdon <dav...@de...> 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 <she...@os...> |
From: Michael B. <mb...@bu...> - 2006-11-29 15:48:01
|
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. |
From: Dan W. <dc...@re...> - 2006-11-29 15:19:41
|
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 |
From: David K. <dav...@de...> - 2006-11-29 15:30:56
|
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 maj...@vg... > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html |
From: Michael R. <ma...@no...> - 2006-11-29 15:59:09
|
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 |
From: Michael B. <mb...@bu...> - 2006-11-29 16:03:43
|
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. |
From: Michael R. <ma...@no...> - 2006-11-30 05:34:08
|
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 |
From: Luis R. R. <mc...@gm...> - 2006-12-01 18:35:27
Attachments:
madwifi-1142-fixed-2.6.18-rc1.diff
|
On 11/29/06, Stephen Hemminger <she...@os...> wrote: > On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:03:28 -0800 > David Kimdon <dav...@de...> 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 |
From: Luis R. R. <mc...@gm...> - 2006-12-01 18:38:03
|
On 12/1/06, Luis R. Rodriguez <mc...@gm...> 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 |
From: David K. <dav...@de...> - 2006-12-01 19:27:23
|
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 01:35:24PM -0500, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On 11/29/06, Stephen Hemminger <she...@os...> wrote: > >On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:03:28 -0800 > > 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. dadwifi is currently based on r1693, release 0.9.2, that is about a hundred changes behind trunk, many of those changes we need not apply to the dadwifi branch (net80211/ hal/), though perhaps it will be easier to just pull them all over, not sure. > 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, . . . > * madwifi-dadwifi-openal: based on the latest dadwifi with the This sounds good to me. -David |
From: Michael R. <ma...@no...> - 2006-12-04 06:28:40
|
Hi. David Kimdon wrote: >> 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, > > . . . > >> * madwifi-dadwifi-openal: based on the latest dadwifi with the > > This sounds good to me. No objections from my side, except that madwifi-dadwifi-openhal should be called dadwifi-openhal (no need to prefix it with madwifi-). David, feel free to create the branches, or let me know if you would like somebody else to take care of that. Luis (and everyone else who is interested in working on one of these two new branches or dadwifi): please contact me offlist (or in IRC (Freenode), my nick there is "otaku42") and tell me what username and password you would like to have. I will setup your accounts asap. Bye, Mike |
From: Michael R. <ma...@no...> - 2006-12-05 14:39:26
|
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 |
From: Luis R. R. <mc...@gm...> - 2006-12-05 15:21:59
|
On 12/5/06, Michael Renzmann <ma...@no...> 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" <re...@op...> 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 |
From: Stephen H. <she...@os...> - 2006-12-05 17:19:22
|
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 10:15:33 -0500 "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mc...@gm...> wrote: > On 12/5/06, Michael Renzmann <ma...@no...> 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" <re...@op...> 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 <she...@os...> |
From: Luis R. R. <mc...@gm...> - 2006-12-05 19:04:14
|
On 12/5/06, Stephen Hemminger <she...@os...> wrote: > On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 10:15:33 -0500 > "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mc...@gm...> wrote: > > > On 12/5/06, Michael Renzmann <ma...@no...> 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" <re...@op...> 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 |