On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I do not think a bisection is necessary. Your successful test of the > old regulatory code suggests to me that there is some kind of problem > with the CRDA database. BTW the "old regulatory code" is actually not "old regulatory code" but instead static regulatory definitions slapped in the kernel just as they were before but under the new regulatory infrastructure guise. > Luis - to fill you in, he can connect to an AP with a hidden essid > using the old regulatory code, but not using CRDA. There seems to be > some critical difference between them. Thanks for bringing this up Larry. If by old regulatory code you mean with CONFIG_WIRELESS_OLD_REGULATORY then I would narrow the search down to testing as follows: --- Without crda: mv /sbin/crda /sbin/crda-foo sudo rmmod your_driver mac80211 cfg80211 sudo modprobe your_driver # Check channels using iw --- With crda: mv /sbin/crda-foo /sbin/crda sudo rmmod your_driver mac80211 cfg80211 sudo modprobe your_driver # check channels using iw --- By default when CONFIG_WIRELESS_OLD_REGULATORY is set the built-in "US" static regulatory domain is used. If crda is present though a new regulatory domain will be updated onto the kernel, so we'll get the new regulatory domain built by crda from the original db.txt. Without crda present the static regulatory domain shall be used. What frequency is the AP on? Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
