On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Bob Copeland <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Dan Williams <dcbw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 16:36 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >>> Prior to this we would rely only on probe responses >>> from the AP to keep associated. We now receive beacons >>> on ath5k. This should fix sporadic disassociations. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Is this also a candidate for -stable? > > Don't think so, see below... > >> >>> --- >>> drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c | 2 ++ >>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c >>> index f5f46fe..5505f45 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c >>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c >>> @@ -2948,6 +2948,8 @@ static void ath5k_configure_filter(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, >>> AR5K_RX_FILTER_PROBEREQ | AR5K_RX_FILTER_PROM; >>> if (sc->opmode != NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION) >>> rfilt |= AR5K_RX_FILTER_PROBEREQ; >>> + if (sc->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION) >>> + rfilt |= AR5K_RX_FILTER_BEACON; >>> if (sc->opmode != NL80211_IFTYPE_AP && >>> sc->opmode != NL80211_IFTYPE_MESH_POINT && >>> test_bit(ATH_STAT_PROMISC, sc->status)) > > Sorry, my fault, this was a direct result of > 60c7e22196fb4230b76db1f5fb283e811b8f3fb3 "ath5k: honor > FIF_BCN_PRBRESP_PROMISC." The problem remains that we have too many > interrupts though if PRBRESP_PROMISC is not set. IIRC my patch made > ath5k behave same as ath9k. Any ideas on a proper fix? If we don't have beacons coming in on ath9k its also an issue and may explain the same exact issue we see there. 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
