On Sat, Dec 04, 2010 at 12:01:34PM +0000, Dave Kilroy wrote: > >> I'm at a loss. I've looked at the wpa_supplicant code, and had another > >> look at the driver. The scan should be a plain wildcard scan - which > >> you've identified works. > >> > >> Does setting scan_ssid=1 in the wpa_supplicant network block change > >> the behaviour? That's usually only necessary for hidden SSIDs - but > >> I'd like to know if the scan succeeds in this case. > > > > No It doesn't work. > > But I have more informations for you. > > > > I have been testing different versions of wpa_supplicant > > and I have found that if a use wpa_supplicant 0.7.0 or earlier, > > it works. With 0.7.1 or newer it fails. > > wpa_supplicant 0.7.0 works even without applying your patch. > > I've set myself up so I can test with orinoco_usb. I can reproduce the > issue (or something that looks the same). > > After much confusion, I suspect the initial scan is being triggered > before the hardware is ready. Internally, wpa_supplicant will do an > 'ifconfig eth1 up' followed by an 'iwlist eth1 scan', and it seems the > driver/hardware wants more time between them. > > Try the following (either in two command prompts, or with > wpa_supplicant in the background): > > prompt1$ wpa_supplicant -dd -ieth1 .... > > prompt2$ ifconfig eth1 down > prompt2$ ifconfig eth1 up > > and see what wpa_supplicant is doing. If it has got scan results then > you're probably seeing what I am. You are right. After running ifconfig eth1 down,up on a second terminal, while wpa_supplicant iis running on the first terminal, it succesfully associates with the AP. Giacomo -- 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
