Centrino support

Centrino support

[Jan Rychter]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 669 bytes --]

From http://news.com.com/2100-1006-993896.html:

  Intel plans Linux support for Centrino

  Intel is working on Linux support for Centrino, its package of chips for
  mobile computers with wireless networking abilities, but the company
  hasn't yet decided how or when to release it.

That was on March 24, 2003.

Well, that was almost 5 months ago. So I figured I'd ask if there's any
progress -- so far the built-in wireless in my notebook still doesn't
work with Linux and the machine is monstrously power-hungry because
Linux doesn't scale the CPU frequency.

I know there are some Intel people on the list -- perhaps someone can
comment?

--J.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Centrino support

[Dave Jones]

On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 11:13:09AM -0700, Jan Rychter wrote:
 > From http://news.com.com/2100-1006-993896.html:
 > 
 >   Intel plans Linux support for Centrino
 > 
 >   Intel is working on Linux support for Centrino, its package of chips for
 >   mobile computers with wireless networking abilities, but the company
 >   hasn't yet decided how or when to release it.
 > 
 > That was on March 24, 2003.
 > 
 > Well, that was almost 5 months ago. So I figured I'd ask if there's any
 > progress -- so far the built-in wireless in my notebook still doesn't
 > work with Linux and the machine is monstrously power-hungry because
 > Linux doesn't scale the CPU frequency.

CPU frequency scaling is supported now at least. (Though you'll need
-ac for 2.4, or 2.6). Wireless is still unsupported AFAIK.

		Dave

-- 
 Dave Jones     http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

Re: Centrino support

[Martin List-Petersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1019 bytes --]

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 20:13, Jan Rychter wrote:
> From http://news.com.com/2100-1006-993896.html:
> 
>   Intel plans Linux support for Centrino
> 
>   Intel is working on Linux support for Centrino, its package of chips for
>   mobile computers with wireless networking abilities, but the company
>   hasn't yet decided how or when to release it.
> 
> That was on March 24, 2003.
> 
> Well, that was almost 5 months ago. So I figured I'd ask if there's any
> progress -- so far the built-in wireless in my notebook still doesn't
> work with Linux and the machine is monstrously power-hungry because
> Linux doesn't scale the CPU frequency.
> 
> I know there are some Intel people on the list -- perhaps someone can
> comment?

Status:
Wlan - not supported

CPU - CPUfreq (-ac tree) and ACPI throttling work just fine. I've got my
Pentium M running at 600 MHz when the Power Supply is plugged out.

Regards,
Martin List-Petersen
martin at list-petersen dot se
--
for ARTIFICIAL FLAVORING!!

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Centrino support

[Bryan O'Sullivan]

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 11:13, Jan Rychter wrote:

> Well, that was almost 5 months ago. So I figured I'd ask if there's any
> progress -- so far the built-in wireless in my notebook still doesn't
> work with Linux and the machine is monstrously power-hungry because
> Linux doesn't scale the CPU frequency.

Intel shows no inclination to release Centrino wireless drivers for
Linux.  There have been vague insinuations that this is due to excessive
software controllability, but no public explanations have been given,
beyond "we're not doing it at this moment".

If you want built-in wireless in the nearish term, you'll have to get a
supported MiniPCI card and replace your Centrino card.

As far as CPU is concerned, if you're using recent 2.5 or 2.6 kernels,
there's Pentium M support in cpufreq.  Jeremy Fitzhardinge has written a
userspace daemon that varies the Pentium M CPU frequency in response to
load.

	<b

Re: Centrino support

[Christian Axelsson]

Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:

>If you want built-in wireless in the nearish term, you'll have to get a
>supported MiniPCI card and replace your Centrino card.
>
>  
>
Got a list of supported good working cards?

>As far as CPU is concerned, if you're using recent 2.5 or 2.6 kernels,
>there's Pentium M support in cpufreq.  Jeremy Fitzhardinge has written a
>userspace daemon that varies the Pentium M CPU frequency in response to
>load.
>  
>
Can you please point me to this daemon?

Regards

--
Christian Axelsson
smiler@lanil.mine.nu

Re: Centrino support

[Randy.Dunlap]

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 22:24:26 +0200 Christian Axelsson <smiler@lanil.mine.nu> wrote:

| Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
| 
| >If you want built-in wireless in the nearish term, you'll have to get a
| >supported MiniPCI card and replace your Centrino card.
| >
| >  
| >
| Got a list of supported good working cards?

Mini-PCI or CardBus?
I think that some people just add a CardBus wireless card.

| >As far as CPU is concerned, if you're using recent 2.5 or 2.6 kernels,
| >there's Pentium M support in cpufreq.  Jeremy Fitzhardinge has written a
| >userspace daemon that varies the Pentium M CPU frequency in response to
| >load.
| >  
| >
| Can you please point me to this daemon?

http://www.goop.org/~jeremy/speedfreq/

--
~Randy

Re: Centrino support

[Bryan O'Sullivan]

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 13:24, Christian Axelsson wrote:

> Got a list of supported good working cards?

There's a Dell TrueMobile card that uses the Orinoco chipset.  If you're
feeling like life is too boring, there are cards based on the newer
Intersil dual 802.11b/g chipsets available, too, and though I haven't
checked into the shape of the drivers, I know they're under active
development.

	<b

Re: Centrino support

[Martin List-Petersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1438 bytes --]

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 22:55, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 13:24, Christian Axelsson wrote:
> 
> > Got a list of supported good working cards?
> 
> There's a Dell TrueMobile card that uses the Orinoco chipset.  If you're
> feeling like life is too boring, there are cards based on the newer
> Intersil dual 802.11b/g chipsets available, too, and though I haven't
> checked into the shape of the drivers, I know they're under active
> development.

The Dell TrueMobile 1150 series are Agere/Orinoco/Hermes based (MiniPCI
and PC-Card available). All other Dell TrueMobile cards are Broadcom
based and have no Linux driver support either.

There are also MiniPCI, PC-Card, USB adapters with 802.11a/b/g and Linux
drivers available: http://sf.net/projects/madwifi

These are based on the Ateros chipset, which also is around in some OEM
products.

> > > As far as CPU is concerned, if you're using recent 2.5 or 2.6
> > > kernels, there's Pentium M support in cpufreq.  Jeremy
> > > Fitzhardinge has written a userspace daemon that varies the
> > > Pentium M CPU frequency in response to
> > > load.
> >
> > Can you please point me to this daemon?

http://sf.net/projects/cpufreqd

Regards,
Martin List-Petersen
martin at list-petersen dot se
--
"An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a
cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup." - H.L. Mencken

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Centrino support

[insecure]

> > > Got a list of supported good working cards?
> >
> > There's a Dell TrueMobile card that uses the Orinoco chipset.  If you're
> > feeling like life is too boring, there are cards based on the newer
> > Intersil dual 802.11b/g chipsets available, too, and though I haven't
> > checked into the shape of the drivers, I know they're under active
> > development.
>
> The Dell TrueMobile 1150 series are Agere/Orinoco/Hermes based (MiniPCI
> and PC-Card available). All other Dell TrueMobile cards are Broadcom
> based and have no Linux driver support either.
>
> There are also MiniPCI, PC-Card, USB adapters with 802.11a/b/g and Linux
> drivers available: http://sf.net/projects/madwifi

That driver contains a binary-only part.

<quote>
The ath_hal module contains the Atheros Hardware Access Layer (HAL).
This code manages much of the chip-specific operation of the driver.
The HAL is provided in a binary-only form in order to comply with FCC
regulations.  In particular, a radio transmitter can only be operated at
power levels and on frequency channels for which it is approved.  The FCC
requires that a software-defined radio cannot be configured by a user
to operate outside the approved power levels and frequency channels.
This makes it difficult to open-source code that enforces limits on
the power levels, frequency channels and other parameters of the radio
transmitter.  See

http://ftp.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/2001/fcc01264.pdf

for the specific FCC regulation.  Because the module is provided in a
binary-only form it is marked "Proprietary"; this means when you load
it you will see messages that your system is now "tainted".
</quote>

US was a free country. It gets worse by the day.
-- 
vda

Re: Centrino support

[Jamie Lokier]

insecure wrote:
> This makes it difficult to open-source code that enforces limits on
> the power levels, frequency channels and other parameters of the radio
> transmitter.  See
> 
> http://ftp.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/2001/fcc01264.pdf
> 
> for the specific FCC regulation.

I have just read that FCC regulation.

It doesn't prevent open-sourcing the code.  It does require that each
software-defined radio must have some kind of authentication mechanism
to ensure that unapproved software cannot be loaded on to the device.

It seems to me that distributing a binary, which is easily modified by
users, (as proven by all the game patches and application cracks out
there), does _not_ satisfy the FCC regulation.

The only way to satisfy the regulation is to have an authentication
mechanism of some kind, so that the radio will not operate with
unapproved software.

If Intel have not implemented an authentication mechanism, then they
are not compliance with the FCC regulation as I read it because it
won't be long before some enterprising user patches the firmware and
makes the radio behave in an unapproved, possibly RF unsafe manner.

If Intel have implement such a mechanism, then regulation is no excuse
for them to not release the source code.

-- Jamie

Re: Centrino support

[Jan Rychter]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2395 bytes --]

>>>>> "Bryan" == Bryan O'Sullivan <bos@serpentine.com>:
 Bryan> On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 11:13, Jan Rychter wrote:
 >> Well, that was almost 5 months ago. So I figured I'd ask if there's
 >> any progress -- so far the built-in wireless in my notebook still
 >> doesn't work with Linux and the machine is monstrously power-hungry
 >> because Linux doesn't scale the CPU frequency.

 Bryan> Intel shows no inclination to release Centrino wireless drivers
 Bryan> for Linux.  There have been vague insinuations that this is due
 Bryan> to excessive software controllability, but no public
 Bryan> explanations have been given, beyond "we're not doing it at this
 Bryan> moment".

 Bryan> If you want built-in wireless in the nearish term, you'll have
 Bryan> to get a supported MiniPCI card and replace your Centrino card.

That's what I find extremely annoying. Especially in the context of
Intel's trumpeted announcements about support for Linux (see the URL in
my previous E-mail). I mean, you either support Linux, or you
don't. Intel announced that support is coming and then hasn't delivered
it.

This is offtopic on this list, but frankly, I'm surprised why RedHat (or
any other Linux company for that matter) hasn't filed an unfair
competition suit yet. Intel's approach basically favors Microsoft over
other companies by giving them a year or so headway before anybody else
has a chance of getting the hardware supported. That surely sounds like
an unfair practice to me.

 Bryan> As far as CPU is concerned, if you're using recent 2.5 or 2.6
 Bryan> kernels, there's Pentium M support in cpufreq.  Jeremy
 Bryan> Fitzhardinge has written a userspace daemon that varies the
 Bryan> Pentium M CPU frequency in response to load.

I keep dreaming about the day when I'll be able to have a modern laptop
with a stable Linux kernel. As for now, it has taken me (on one of my
laptops) about 1.5 years to get to a point where 2.4 works, most of my
hardware works, and software suspend (pretty much a requirement for
laptops) works. I'm not about to give that up easily, so I'm not that
eager to jump to 2.5/2.6.

Question time:

1. Will cpufreq make it into the standard 2.4 kernels?
2. If not, will Alan incorporate swsusp into -ac kernels? (given that
   -ac kernels seem to have cpufreq included)
3. Where does one get 2.4 cpufreq?

thanks,
--J.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Centrino support

[Bryan O'Sullivan]

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 13:35, Jan Rychter wrote:

> I keep dreaming about the day when I'll be able to have a modern laptop
> with a stable Linux kernel. As for now, it has taken me (on one of my
> laptops) about 1.5 years to get to a point where 2.4 works, most of my
> hardware works, and software suspend (pretty much a requirement for
> laptops) works. I'm not about to give that up easily, so I'm not that
> eager to jump to 2.5/2.6.

Can't say that's been my experience.  I bought a new Thinkpad X31 the
other day, and it's already running 2.6.0-test3.  Suspend works, all's
happy.


> 1. Will cpufreq make it into the standard 2.4 kernels?

Highly unlikely.

> 3. Where does one get 2.4 cpufreq?

There are snapshots available at www.linux.org.uk (hint: Google for
"cpufreq"), or in -ac.  See the cpufreq mailing list archives for a
bunch of daemons that control this stuff in various semi-cooked ways.

	<b

Re: Centrino support

[Jan Rychter]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1634 bytes --]

>>>>> "Bryan" == Bryan O'Sullivan <bos@serpentine.com>:
 Bryan> On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 13:35, Jan Rychter wrote:
 >> I keep dreaming about the day when I'll be able to have a modern
 >> laptop with a stable Linux kernel. As for now, it has taken me (on
 >> one of my laptops) about 1.5 years to get to a point where 2.4
 >> works, most of my hardware works, and software suspend (pretty much
 >> a requirement for laptops) works. I'm not about to give that up
 >> easily, so I'm not that eager to jump to 2.5/2.6.

 Bryan> Can't say that's been my experience.  I bought a new Thinkpad
 Bryan> X31 the other day, and it's already running 2.6.0-test3.
 Bryan> Suspend works, all's happy.

Lucky you! That's because almost two years (or so) of heavy work by many
people went into this. Also, you're probably lucky with your Thinkpad.

When I bought this laptop (a Sharp Mebius PC-MT1-H5) back in Sept 2001,
there weren't many machines on the market that had only ACPI (and no
APM). And Linux ACPI wasn't in a very sane state back then, not to
mention swsusp. It took almost two years for the software to mature, and
only recently did I get a stable machine that I can work on for a month
without rebooting (suspending/resuming several times a day).

I've just gotten a Centrino-based Toshiba Dynabook SS S7/290LNKW, and
the story continues -- I've already hit at least two ACPI bugs, while
swsusp problems seem to have been ironed out thanks to hard work by
Nigel Cunningham. And of course, the built-in wireless card does not
work. My guess is another 6 months (if not more) until Linux works on
it.

--J.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Centrino support

[Dave Jones]

On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 01:35:17PM -0700, Jan Rychter wrote:

 > 1. Will cpufreq make it into the standard 2.4 kernels?

We asked Marcelo if he wanted it for 2.4.23, and he didn't object,
so time permitting, it could show up there next time.

 > 2. If not, will Alan incorporate swsusp into -ac kernels? (given that
 >    -ac kernels seem to have cpufreq included)

Very unlikely.

 > 3. Where does one get 2.4 cpufreq?

Normally http://www.codemonkey.org.uk/projects/cpufreq
However the box hosting that website dies within a few hours if I restart
apache (Its incredibly underpowered for the load it gets), so plans are
afoot to move it to something that can handle it. Should be back up
(for good this time hopefully) within a week or so.

		Dave

-- 
 Dave Jones     http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

Re: Centrino support

[Alan Cox]

On Gwe, 2003-08-15 at 21:35, Jan Rychter wrote:
> Question time:
> 
> 1. Will cpufreq make it into the standard 2.4 kernels?

In time maybe - up to Marcelo. 

> 2. If not, will Alan incorporate swsusp into -ac kernels? (given that
>    -ac kernels seem to have cpufreq included)

Not in its current form. To do the job well swsuspend needs the kernel 
device model. 

Re: Centrino support

[Rob Landley]

On Saturday 16 August 2003 11:12, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Gwe, 2003-08-15 at 21:35, Jan Rychter wrote:
> > Question time:
> >
> > 1. Will cpufreq make it into the standard 2.4 kernels?
>
> In time maybe - up to Marcelo.
>
> > 2. If not, will Alan incorporate swsusp into -ac kernels? (given that
> >    -ac kernels seem to have cpufreq included)
>
> Not in its current form. To do the job well swsuspend needs the kernel
> device model.

I've tried it a few times on 2.6.0-test3 right after the system comes up and I 
log in to text mode, and the sucker spits out exactly one line of text 
(something like "Suspending processes:") and hangs with the cursor right 
after the semicolon.  After about a minute I hit ctrl-scroll lock, but 
everything except the suspend thread (which was waiting in some kind of yield 
for other threads to do something) scrolled off the top and I don't know how 
to cursor up to see it (or get it to not scroll off).

I'd be happy to test someting better.  APM suspend doesn't work on my new 
thinkpad, so it's swsusp or nothing.  Currently, it's "shutdown -h now", 
which has some obvious deficiencies...

Rob

Re: Centrino support

[Brandon Stewart]

I thought that this line of argument was due to FCC regulations. That 
is, software settings would allow the hardware to violate frequency or 
strength-of-signal limitations set by government regulations. This is 
only from memory, so feel free to correct.

-Brandon

Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:

>On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 11:13, Jan Rychter wrote:
>  
>
>>Well, that was almost 5 months ago. So I figured I'd ask if there's any
>>progress -- so far the built-in wireless in my notebook still doesn't
>>work with Linux and the machine is monstrously power-hungry because
>>Linux doesn't scale the CPU frequency.
>>    
>>
>
>Intel shows no inclination to release Centrino wireless drivers for
>Linux.  There have been vague insinuations that this is due to excessive
>software controllability, but no public explanations have been given,
>beyond "we're not doing it at this moment".
>
>If you want built-in wireless in the nearish term, you'll have to get a
>supported MiniPCI card and replace your Centrino card.
>
>As far as CPU is concerned, if you're using recent 2.5 or 2.6 kernels,
>there's Pentium M support in cpufreq.  Jeremy Fitzhardinge has written a
>userspace daemon that varies the Pentium M CPU frequency in response to
>load.
>

Re: Centrino support

[Stephan von Krawczynski]

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 16:46:19 -0400
Brandon Stewart <rbrandonstewart@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I thought that this line of argument was due to FCC regulations. That 
> is, software settings would allow the hardware to violate frequency or 
> strength-of-signal limitations set by government regulations. This is 
> only from memory, so feel free to correct.

I think I have read in an earlier thread something the like.
But I cannot understand how this can be logically linked to releasing docs. If
all companies would follow this thought e.g. Siemens would never have released
the docs for ISDN chipsets and therefore no ISDN drivers would be in the
kernel. I'd rather say someone with money is afraid ...
Mobile equipment like laptops is a booming market and it all turns around
shares...
There is another point about this topic. How does M$ (with their centrino
drivers) guarantee that no user tries to switch on the addtional ETSI
frequencies? I doubt this is possible at all. Of course you can simply ignore
that there are ETSI frequencies which basically means to ignore the
overwhelming part of europe and their respective regulation.
Some political explosives are in this thread ...

Regards,
Stephan

Re: Centrino support

[Jan Rychter]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1753 bytes --]

>>>>> "Stephan" == Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>:
 Stephan> On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 16:46:19 -0400
 Stephan> Brandon Stewart <rbrandonstewart@yahoo.com> wrote:

 >> I thought that this line of argument was due to FCC
 >> regulations. That is, software settings would allow the hardware to
 >> violate frequency or strength-of-signal limitations set by
 >> government regulations. This is only from memory, so feel free to
 >> correct.

 Stephan> I think I have read in an earlier thread something the like.
 Stephan> But I cannot understand how this can be logically linked to
 Stephan> releasing docs. If all companies would follow this thought
 Stephan> e.g. Siemens would never have released the docs for ISDN
 Stephan> chipsets and therefore no ISDN drivers would be in the
 Stephan> kernel. I'd rather say someone with money is afraid ...

Yes, that sounds rather ridiculous. Sooner or later someone is going to
reverse-engineer the thing, so not releasing drivers or specs just
delays this moment. If there's a manager at Intel that thinks this way,
he doesn't understand much about security.

[...]

 Stephan> Some political explosives are in this thread ...

Politically, this sounds to me like an antitrust case against Intel and
Microsoft handed on a platter. A major hardware manufacturer releases
information and software only to one dominating software company, while
locking out the others.

Unfortunately, we live in a world of compromises. If I were RedHat, I'd
stay real quiet and play nice in order to get Intel's cooperation on
servers (which brings revenue) instead of fighting for laptops (which is
a niche market for Linux, in a chicken-and-egg sort of way).

It's rather sad.

--J.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Centrino support

[Jamie Lokier]

Jan Rychter wrote:
> >>>>> "Stephan" == Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>:
>  Stephan> I think I have read in an earlier thread something the like.
>  Stephan> But I cannot understand how this can be logically linked to
>  Stephan> releasing docs. If all companies would follow this thought
>  Stephan> e.g. Siemens would never have released the docs for ISDN
>  Stephan> chipsets and therefore no ISDN drivers would be in the
>  Stephan> kernel. I'd rather say someone with money is afraid ...
> 
> Yes, that sounds rather ridiculous. Sooner or later someone is going to
> reverse-engineer the thing, so not releasing drivers or specs just
> delays this moment. If there's a manager at Intel that thinks this way,
> he doesn't understand much about security.

Let's be fair to Intel for a moment.

With hardware radios, anyone can open it up, fiddle with electronics,
and make it do something illegal, possibly dangerous.  Manufacturers
aren't required to make them impregnable!

All manufacturers have to do is not put any knobs on the front which
can make the radio do unapproved things.

Folk are allowed to fiddle with radio electronics, with care, as long
as they get themselves a radio license and stick to the rules.

They can even sell an altered device, if they take it through the FCC
approval process.

With a software radio, it's analagous.  The manufacturer doesn't have
to make it _impossible_ to reprogram, they just have to make it hard
enough that ordinary users won't do it.

Releasing the source code may or may not result in ordinary users
reprograming their radios in harmful ways.  Though, you can imagine
people would circulate patches to boost the power in no time.

At least there is some hope for the expert hobbyist: they _can_
reverse engineer the device.  It is good that this is possible.

If Intel build a crypto-based authentication mechanism into their
software radios, then there is no hope for the amateur radio hobbyist
to fiddle with their radios.

So, really, Intel has done the amateur radio community a favour by
leaving the tantalising possibility of reverse engineering the driver,
compared with a DRM solution which totally prevents even expert tinkering.

-- Jamie

Re: Centrino support

[Alan Cox]

On Sad, 2003-08-16 at 20:58, Jan Rychter wrote
> Unfortunately, we live in a world of compromises. If I were RedHat, I'd
> stay real quiet and play nice in order to get Intel's cooperation on
> servers (which brings revenue) instead of fighting for laptops (which is
> a niche market for Linux, in a chicken-and-egg sort of way).

Vendors are beginning to make commitments to Linux support on some
laptops, in addition Intel and ATI in paticular have been doing nice
things to the laptop chipset market by drastically shrinking the number
of variants. Centrino in some ways is a help as is the ATI+ALI setup
used by all the nice mobile Athlon laptops - now when we get one working
the rest tend to just follow.

Alan

Re: Centrino support

[Tomas Szepe]

> [rbrandonstewart@yahoo.com]
> 
> I thought that this line of argument was due to FCC regulations. That 
> is, software settings would allow the hardware to violate frequency or 
> strength-of-signal limitations set by government regulations. This is 
> only from memory, so feel free to correct.

As though one couldn't do all this with other wireless hw...

-- 
Tomas Szepe <szepe@dragon.cz>

Re: Centrino support

[Helge Hafting]

Brandon Stewart wrote:
> I thought that this line of argument was due to FCC regulations. That 
> is, software settings would allow the hardware to violate frequency or 
> strength-of-signal limitations set by government regulations. This is 
> only from memory, so feel free to correct.

This does not in any way prevent them from releasing a driver,
open or closed source.  It merely makes tampering with
the driver illegal.

And it doesn't prevent them from merely releasing programming specs
if they're too cheap to make a driver either.  Of course whoever
programs the driver will then have to get approved
by the bureaucracy himself, or leave it to some linux vendor
before it can be (legally) used.

No driver _and_ no specs means they aren't supporting linux
at the moment.

Helge Hafting

Re: Centrino support

[James H. Cloos Jr.]

>>>>> "Brandon" == Brandon Stewart <rbrandonstewart@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>>> "Helge" == Helge Hafting <helgehaf@aitel.hist.no> writes:

Brandon> I thought that this line of argument was due to FCC
Brandon> regulations. That is, software settings would allow the
Brandon> hardware to violate frequency or strength-of-signal
Brandon> limitations set by government regulations. This is only
Brandon> from memory, so feel free to correct.

Helge> This does not in any way prevent them from releasing a driver,
Helge> open or closed source.  It merely makes tampering with the
Helge> driver illegal.

Unless of course it can be programmed to listen in on the AMPS cell
phone band(s).  In that case it could arguably be a felony for them to
release the programming info....  (Stupid law, but it has been
enforced rather obsessively....)

-JimC

Re: Centrino support

[Jamie Lokier]

James H. Cloos Jr. wrote:
> Helge> This does not in any way prevent them from releasing a driver,
> Helge> open or closed source.  It merely makes tampering with the
> Helge> driver illegal.
> 
> Unless of course it can be programmed to listen in on the AMPS cell
> phone band(s).  In that case it could arguably be a felony for them to
> release the programming info....  (Stupid law, but it has been
> enforced rather obsessively....)

How is that different from selling a radio which can be retuned by
opening it up and changing some resistors and capacitors?

-- Jamie

Re: Centrino support

[Micha Feigin]

On Wed, 2003-08-20 at 02:55, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> James H. Cloos Jr. wrote:
> > Helge> This does not in any way prevent them from releasing a driver,
> > Helge> open or closed source.  It merely makes tampering with the
> > Helge> driver illegal.
> > 
> > Unless of course it can be programmed to listen in on the AMPS cell
> > phone band(s).  In that case it could arguably be a felony for them to
> > release the programming info....  (Stupid law, but it has been
> > enforced rather obsessively....)
> 
> How is that different from selling a radio which can be retuned by
> opening it up and changing some resistors and capacitors?

arguably a patch is much easier to implement and distribute where as
changing some resistors and capacitors would take more technical
knowledge, although I don't know where the stands on that.

> 
> -- Jamie
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: Centrino support

[Jussi Laako]

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 21:13, Jan Rychter wrote:

> Well, that was almost 5 months ago. So I figured I'd ask if there's any
> progress -- so far the built-in wireless in my notebook still doesn't
> work with Linux and the machine is monstrously power-hungry because
> Linux doesn't scale the CPU frequency.
> 
> I know there are some Intel people on the list -- perhaps someone can
> comment?

I have made a patch set for my laptop which you may like to try. It
mainly contains stuff from -aa and -ac kernels and various other pieces.

See http://www.sonarnerd.net/projects/linux/

With this and my backport of latest XFree86 ATI drivers I have Linux
running nicely on my Compaq Evo N1015v and N1020v laptops. At least it
_subjectively_ warms up less and consumes less power under Linux
compared to Windows XP.


-- 
Jussi Laako <jussi.laako@pp.inet.fi>

Re: Centrino support

[Jean Tourrilhes]

Christian Axelsson wrote :
> 
> Got a list of supported good working cards?

	Google -> Linux Wireless
	My Linux Wireless Howto contains pretty much the latest info
on the subject, so I doubt you would not find the info you are looking
for...
	Regards,

	Jean

Re: Centrino support

[Ricardo Galli]

>> Can you please point me to this daemon?
>
> http://www.goop.org/~jeremy/speedfreq/

Or  http://mnm.uib.es/~gallir/cpudyn/ 
if you want something very simple but effective and tested in almost every 
processor (it works in 2.6.0 and 2.4 plus cpufreq patches, for example -ac 
tree).



-- 
  ricardo galli       GPG id C8114D34
  http://mnm.uib.es/~gallir/