Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 22 Feb 2008 21:10:39 +0300 | From | Alexey Zaytsev <> | Subject | Re: bcm43xx regression in 2.6.24 (with patch) |
| |
Michael Buesch wrote: > On Friday 22 February 2008 12:17:15 Alexey Zaytsev wrote: >> Hello. >> >> The bcm43xx driver won't work any more, if the b44 Ethernet >> driver is enabled. This happens because the b44 driver >> needlessly enables the b43_pci_bridge code, which claims >> the same pci ids as the bcm43xx driver. The b43_pci_bridge >> code is needed for the b43{legacy} drivers, but for the >> b44, only the "ssb pci core" is needed. >> >> This patch separates the ssb b43 pci bridge and the ssb pci >> core config options and enables only the needed ones. > > Nack. Switch to b43. bcm43xx is going to be removed anyway. > I'm not going to play these kconfig SELECT tricks anymore. > We had _lots_ of bugs there. People submitted patches that > obviously looked OK and still they turned out to break > some dependencies. KConfig SELECT is a feature from hell. >
Sorry, I don't get it. You are going to remove the (somehow) working driver, while there are known problems with the new one? Why? To me it sounds like _breaking old but working code_ to get _more bug reports on the new code_. But, what was the goal providing users with working drivers, or getting more bug reports?
And please look at the problem from a user's view point. I'm happily using the 2.6.23 kernel. The bcm43xx driver is the only one available. And it works somehow (well, no s2ram). Now I upgrade to the 2.6.24 kernel. I see there is a new b43 driver and try it. For some reason it does not work, even after I follow the firmware upgrading instructions. Not a big deal, I clearly understand that you have to work with reverse-engineered specs and even with good specs, bugs happen, no problem. I'll try to debug it in the weekend and maybe will send a bug report or patch.
But right now I have other business, sorry. The problem is, now also the old (but not now marked as deprecated) driver stops working.
If this is not a repgession, than I don't know what is. And if it is a regression, it should be fixed at least in the 2.6.24.y series, do you agree?
I have provided a patch that I believe is trivial, that I have tested with all possible config option combinations I thought were possible, and that fixes the regression. If you have a reason to believe it is wrong, please say it, I won't be offended. If there is a problem with the patch, I'll gladly fix and resend it.
This Nack leaves me with one option - to switch back to 2.6.23. Sorry, no testing, probably more bugs not found in 2.6.24. ;(
| |