On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 04:24:45PM +0200, rain_maker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > The drivers rt2500usb and rt73usb both contain the usb id 148f:2573 while only > the latter is suitable for devices with that id. > > As a consequence, both drivers will be loaded and system log shows messages > like "rt2500usb_init_eeprom: Error - Invalid RT chipset detected". > > If you use the above search term, you will find more than 1500 hits with a > well known search engine, confirming that rt2500usb is always the wrong > driver for devices with usb id 148f:2573 and quite often as a side effect > confusion arose about this -non fatal but misleading- error message in the > respective bug reports or threads. I also get more than 100 hits from (probably the same) well-known search engine for "rt73usb_init_eeprom: Error - Invalid RT chipset detected". I'm sure those aren't all for the same USB ID, and perhaps none of them are. Then again, not all of the 1500+ that you cite are for the same USB ID either. So I'm curious, how can you be sure that 148f:2573 is _always_ wrong for rt2500usb? I do acknowledge that the "73" part makes it suspicious... John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx might be all we have. Be ready. -- 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
