On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:49:26 -0700, Sam Leffler wrote > This patch against HEAD imports the work that's been sitting in the > sam_wifi p4 branch: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~sam/sam_wifi-20070601.patch.gz > > To apply it do something like > > cd /usr/src > gzcat sam_wifi-20070601.patch.gz | patch -p4 > > Expect one reject in sys/net80211/ieee80211_input.c.rej; it can be ignored. > In addition to the reject cited above, I also got the following when patching a snapshot from today: Hunk #91 failed at 5301. 1 out of 109 hunks failed--saving rejects to sys/dev/ath/if_ath.c.rej *************** *** 4599,4605 **** * o notify the rate control algorithm */ sc->sc_imask &= ~(HAL_INT_SWBA | HAL_INT_BMISS); - ath_hal_intrset(ah, sc->sc_imask &~ HAL_INT_GLOBAL); /* XXX can't use taskqueue_drain 'cuz we're holding sc_mtx */ taskqueue_drain(sc->sc_tq, &sc->sc_rxtask); taskqueue_drain(sc->sc_tq, &sc->sc_rxorntask); --- 5301,5307 ---- * o notify the rate control algorithm */ sc->sc_imask &= ~(HAL_INT_SWBA | HAL_INT_BMISS); + ath_intrset(sc, sc->sc_imask &~ HAL_INT_GLOBAL); /* XXX can't use taskqueue_drain 'cuz we're holding sc_mtx */ taskqueue_drain(sc->sc_tq, &sc->sc_rxtask); taskqueue_drain(sc->sc_tq, &sc->sc_rxorntask); I see there was a change made to if_ath.c in HEAD yesterday related to taskqueue_drain. Is it safe to ignore this reject as well? Thanks for the work - looking forward to vap support. YuriReceived on Sun Jun 03 2007 - 20:19:44 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:11 UTC