linux-kernel - Re: rt2x00: slow wifi with correct basic rate bitmap (was Re: stable? quality assurance?)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100713153530.GC3835@tuxdriver.com>
Date:	Tue, 13 Jul 2010 11:35:31 -0400
From:	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
To:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Cc:	Alejandro Riveira Fernández 
	<ariveira@...il.com>, Martin Steigerwald <Martin@...htvoll.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: rt2x00: slow wifi with correct basic rate bitmap (was Re:
 stable? quality assurance?)

On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 02:50:14PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Alejandro Riveira Fernández wrote:
> >  I for one stopped booting into -rc kernels.
> >  The fact that still have to patch my kernels with a *one* liner
> >  since 2.6.29 kernel [1] does not give me confidence on the "test
> >  report/bisect and it will be fixed" promise some have made in this
> >  threath
> >  
> >  [1] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13362
> 
> There were promises made in this thread?  Then I must have read a
> different mailinglist or so.
> 
> I do not know why your WLAN regression has not been fixed yet, but at
> least it seems rather plausible why commit
> 7e0986c17f695952ce5d61ed793ce048ba90a661 is not going to be reverted (if
> such a revert is the one-liner that you are referring to).
> 
> Why is one reporter's rt2500 OK now though but not yours?  Are there
> different card revisions or firmwares out there that require quirk handling?

The patch (7e0986c1) corrects an obvious error.  Reverting it might
improve your (i.e. Alejandro) performance, but it seems likely to
cause connectivity problems for others.

The fact that reverting 7e098c1 helps you suggests that rt2500usb
isn't using the basic_rates map properly.  But after reviewing the
code and the data I have, I can't see what would be causing that.
It is at least possible that your AP is sending bad rate information.
Have you tried this device with other APs?

John
-- 
John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@...driver.com			might be all we have.  Be ready.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/