From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QJVZf-0002ag-G9 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 18:52:55 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 45CFBE0160; Mon, 9 May 2011 18:51:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D879CE0160 for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 18:51:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyi11 with SMTP id 11so5657638wyi.40 for ; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:51:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent :references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=c+gM+0LFfEvkpR+AOXegLpoqeQe3SlCZYdlBeGzJeq8=; b=m2TYH5BDsq1fFjf3gR83IABmvHHyCfK9NEA+Ps1K8H9cfYygUdLU1Ip1G/INXeLebi Xvo7uN4JThLejHRl7vL/maGilZBQk1YbVb3DTJ4JclGHlKx7zfybCAYztOzGljc/TSXM zzVjqOS2bRz76k/e7utNYTpsnZ4TDrJgX3uSw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=ZQPxep2VjK9K9FaswOMOvcIq/HCtHedUYOhT0i6vPfqR96rbIXGnT1nkVNBe8obsvO KcsetT+A5GyN4TBB1aZrkZ/Tr5aSweq8hECkiWP9jrJfd1hVMA128AFj4hyeWl/yh1HM zc/d+bIn5vmLIL9niMiy+nCqeDB0fygcXwTTE= Received: by 10.227.62.210 with SMTP id y18mr1764149wbh.18.1304967066389; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dell_xps.localnet (230.3.169.217.in-addr.arpa [217.169.3.230]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w12sm3928141wby.58.2011.05.09.11.51.04 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 09 May 2011 11:51:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Mick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Unable to set wireless regulatory domain Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 19:51:26 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.37-gentoo-r4; KDE/4.4.5; x86_64; ; ) References: <921BCC7A-7941-42B1-86E9-EADFBCB8B3BD@jnielsen.net> <201105062115.09283.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1362752.pp0uIznjPz"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201105091951.40031.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: c42e65ba49eb5825ac427ab73a0d19d4 --nextPart1362752.pp0uIznjPz Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Monday 09 May 2011 17:20:49 John Nielsen wrote: > On May 6, 2011, at 4:14 PM, Mick wrote: > > On Friday 06 May 2011 18:04:31 John Nielsen wrote: > >> Doesn't look like this went through the first time; re-sending without > >> attachment. > >>=20 > >> On May 5, 2011, at 6:52 PM, Paul Hartman wrote: > >>> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:40 PM, John Nielsen =20 wrote: > >>>> I am trying to set up a 5GHz wireless access point on an Alix 3d2 > >>>> board with an AR9220 (ath9k "Merlin") PCI card. I have done so > >>>> successfully using Fedora 14 on identical hardware but I would > >>>> greatly prefer to use Gentoo so I can use a more recent kernel and > >>>> customize things appropriately for the platform. > >>>=20 > >>> It seems like everything is pretty much the same, other than the > >>> kernel (and presumably the ath9k driver). But I would look at the udev > >>> rules for CRDA to be sure they match and are being applied the same on > >>> both systems. You shouldn't ever need to "iw reg set" on a system with > >>> CRDA, it should do it for you. So I wonder if you're setting it, and > >>> then CRDA is immediately setting it back to 00... > >>=20 > >> The udev rule for CRDA is the same on both systems, and matches what is > >> shown on http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/Regulatory/CRDA. The > >> Fedora box also has a magic rule to call /sbin/setregdomain when an > >> 80211 interface is added, which is a shell script that infers the > >> regdomain from the currently set timezone. The punch line of the script > >> is simply a call to "iw reg set $COUNTRY" > >>=20 > >> However, I'm not sure crda is being called appropriately on the Gentoo > >> box. > >=20 > > On the Fedora machine I see this in dmesg: > >>>> [ 17.248674] cfg80211: Calling CRDA for country: US > >>>> [ 18.848206] cfg80211: Regulatory domain changed to country: US > >>=20 > >> and I don't ever see anything similar on the Gentoo machine, even when > >> running "iw reg set" by hand. Further, I don't see anything in the > >> output of "udevadm monitor --environment kernel". > >>=20 > >> I just dropped the kernel from the Fedora machine on to the Gentoo box > >> and (somewhat surprisingly) it works just fine. The reg domain gets set > >> no problem, hostapd starts, life is good--except that now I feel like > >> I've sinned against nature and I'd like to get my own, smaller kernel > >> back. > >>=20 > >> While it's possible the new kernel version is broken I rather suspect > >> that I have configured it badly. I set out to configure a minimal > >> kernel with just the features and drivers I want on this hardware and > >> no need for modules or an initramfs. Does cfg80211 need to be a module > >> to work properly? I wouldn't think so. > >>=20 > >> I'll do some more experimenting but in the mean time here's my kernel > >> config in case anyone has ideas on what could be wrong. Thanks! > >>=20 > >> Config file here: http://pastebin.com/S68ye6Pz > >=20 > > I suggest that you run a diff --suppress-common-lines -y between the > > Fedora and your own kernel to find out what's different between the two > > as far as your driver is concerned. >=20 > The outright diff was far too verbose to be useful, but looking at "lsmod" > output when running the Fedora kernel was instructive. I recognized > everything as being in by Gentoo kernel except for "rfkill", which was > listed as a dependency of cfg80211. Long story short, I got it working > like I want by: >=20 > 1) Including RFKILL in my kernel config and > 2) Building cfg80211, mac80211, rfkill, and all parts of the ath9k driver > as modules >=20 > Just adding RFKILL to a static (module-less) kernel didn't fix it, and ju= st > building cfg80211 and friends as modules without RFKILL also didn't fix > it; I had to do both. >=20 > Thanks all for your responses so far. I'll be happy to ditch Fedora. :) >=20 > For future reference, does anyone know why either of the above would be > required? If I see the same behavior in the latest git kernel should I > file a bug? If so, where (since I doubt this is a Gentoo issue)? I wouldn't have thought that you *must* have rfkill built in as a module fo= r=20 it to work. However, I have my wireless drivers (inc. rfkill) built in as modules. I d= id=20 this because I need to pass some options to the wireless driver at some poi= nt. The only time I had to build something as a module was alsa, because otherw= ise=20 I couldn't configure my sound card on a particular box (alsaconf/alsactl=20 expected it to be a module so that it can probe it). I ended up compiling = it=20 as a module since. Perhaps someone else can advise on this rfkill issue. =2D-=20 Regards, Mick --nextPart1362752.pp0uIznjPz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk3IN7sACgkQVTDTR3kpaLaPoQCeJPbxiL57pcr1mvAPpe6I0LNN 0RAAoO4APtsj/zNpCsRcNEdHepwR2hvb =rrdC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1362752.pp0uIznjPz--