Wireless card not communicating using ndiswrapper !?
Hello,
I have a problem with my SMC 2835W card seemingly not transmitting any radio
signal while using ndiswrapper.
I have installed and activated ndiswrapper on SuSE 9.1 (2.6.5-7.111-default).
When inserting my SMC 2835W card in the PCMCIA slot, the system/ndiswrapper
recognize the card.
/var/log/messages is telling me :
kernel: PCI: Enabling device 0000:02:00.0 (0000 -> 0002)
kernel: PCI: Setting latency timer of device 0000:02:00.0 to 64
kernel: ndiswrapper: Buggy ndis driver trying to use unintilized spinlock.
Trying to recover...ok.
kernel: wlan0: ndiswrapper ethernet device 00:04:e2:cb:c9:88 using driver
2835wicb.sys
kernel: wlan0: no IPv6 routers present
This look all-right to me, ndiswrapper sees the correct MAC of the card, but
the card remains totally dark and ifstatus wlan0 tells me :
wlan0 is up
4: wlan0:
On Tuesday 30 November 2004 11:12 am, Jan Elders wrote:
1 of 2 configured routes for interface wlan0 up wlan0 IEEE 802.11g ESSID:"" Nickname:"MEDION" Mode:Managed Frequency:2.437GHz Access Point: FF:FF:FF:FF:FF:FF Bit Rate=2Mb/s Tx-Power:32 dBm RTS thr=2347 B Fragment thr=2346 B Encryption key:FABE-DEC5-12 Security mode:restricted Power Management:off Link Quality:100 Signal level:0 Noise level:0 Rx invalid nwid:0 Rx invalid crypt:0 Rx invalid frag:0 Tx excessive retries:0 Invalid misc:0 Missed beacon:0
Apparently it does not see the Access Point, which is 100% certain functioning all-right. Also "Signal level:0" suggests to me that the card is not transmitting any radio signal.
More likely not Receiving any signal, as there would be no point in monitoring your own transmission signal level. Have you tried fiddeling with the encription and security mode? And are you sure you have the right Essid?
Using the same card on the same laptop before with Linuxant DriverLoader did work correctly, but I abandoned that solution for other reasons. Also under Windows it works allright.
I like DriverLoader, Its always worked better than Ndiswrapper. Since the approach they use is virtually identical, why abandon the one the works? Surely its not the $19 the bugs you? -- _____________________________________ John Andersen
On Wednesday 01 December 2004 02:32 am, John Andersen wrote:
Using the same card on the same laptop before with Linuxant DriverLoader did work correctly, but I abandoned that solution for other reasons. Also under Windows it works allright.
I like DriverLoader, Its always worked better than Ndiswrapper. Since the approach they use is virtually identical, why abandon the one the works? Surely its not the $19 the bugs you?
I would have to seond John's suggestion, but not cause ndiswrapper is not as good although that may be the case. I had a pcmcia card working fine with ndiswrapper until I upgraded via Yast, then I got the same problems as you. Installing Driverloader solved that problem Just the other day I tried the latest ndiswrapper and drivers which still refused to work. Go figure! I have no idea what in the upgrade killed ndiswrapper but I guess that is a moot point now. RA -- Old age ain't for Sissies!
Richard wrote:
On Wednesday 01 December 2004 02:32 am, John Andersen wrote:
I like DriverLoader, Its always worked better than Ndiswrapper. Since the approach they use is virtually identical, why abandon the one the works? Surely its not the $19 the bugs you?
I would have to seond John's suggestion, but not cause ndiswrapper is not as good although that may be the case. I had a pcmcia card working fine with ndiswrapper until I upgraded via Yast, then I got the same problems as you. Installing Driverloader solved that problem Just the other day I tried the latest ndiswrapper and drivers which still refused to work. Go figure!
As someone who has a pcmcia card that refuses to work under the 9.2 drivers, I may have to use Driverloader. What issues are there using it with SuSE? I presume its a manual fiddle configure and deleting the previous Yast entry? -- Tim Nicholson http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this.
On Tuesday 30 November 2004 11:12 am, Jan Elders wrote:
1 of 2 configured routes for interface wlan0 up wlan0 IEEE 802.11g ESSID:"" Nickname:"MEDION" Mode:Managed Frequency:2.437GHz Access Point: FF:FF:FF:FF:FF:FF Bit Rate=2Mb/s Tx-Power:32 dBm RTS thr=2347 B Fragment thr=2346 B Encryption key:FABE-DEC5-12 Security mode:restricted Power Management:off Link Quality:100 Signal level:0 Noise level:0 Rx invalid nwid:0 Rx invalid crypt:0 Rx invalid frag:0 Tx excessive retries:0 Invalid misc:0 Missed beacon:0
Apparently it does not see the Access Point, which is 100% certain functioning all-right. Also "Signal level:0" suggests to me that the card is not transmitting any radio signal.
More likely not Receiving any signal, as there would be no point in monitoring your own transmission signal level. Maybe, but then it would still be a card problem because the Access Point is certainly sending. It is continuously serving other PCs without any problem. And, as I said, the card is technically OK because it works fine under Windows and for some time with DriverLoader as well. So, why would it remain dark although the system "sees" the card with Ndiswrapper, which has loaded the correct driver (2835wicb.sys) ? Have you tried fiddeling with the encription and security mode? And are you sure you have the right Essid? No offence, but I am 100% certain that the encryption, security mode, ESSID, channel, etc. etc. are configured all-right.
Using the same card on the same laptop before with Linuxant DriverLoader did work correctly, but I abandoned that solution for other reasons. I like DriverLoader, Its always worked better than Ndiswrapper. Since the approach they use is virtually identical, why abandon the one the works? Surely its not the $19 the bugs you? Certainly not. I tried DriverLoader and it worked fine initially, until I experienced that it "froze" my system at irregular random times. Nobody could give me help with
On Wednesday 01 December 2004 09:32, John Andersen wrote: that problem. That's why I abandoned it and started looking for another solution, i.e. Ndiswrapper. If I could solve the "freeze" problem I would certainly hurry back to DriverLoader. Cheers, -- Jan Elders the Netherlands http://www.xs4all.nl/~jrme/ "Home of the Network Acronyms"
On Wednesday 01 December 2004 19:53, Jan Elders wrote: // CUT
I like DriverLoader, Its always worked better than Ndiswrapper. Since the approach they use is virtually identical, why abandon the one the works? Surely its not the $19 the bugs you? Certainly not. I tried DriverLoader and it worked fine initially, until I experienced that it "froze" my system at irregular random times. Nobody could give me help with that problem. That's why I abandoned it and started looking for another solution, i.e. Ndiswrapper. If I could solve the "freeze" problem I would certainly hurry back to DriverLoader.
This particular problem has been solved. I removed ndiswrapper 0.8 and reinstalled 0.12 Now the card is functioning well, but ................... after a while I am experiencing exactly the same "freeze" problem that I had with DriverLoader !!!!??????? Where should/could I look for clues ? Cheers, -- Jan Elders the Netherlands http://www.xs4all.nl/~jrme/ "Home of the Network Acronyms"
On Wednesday 01 December 2004 04:11 pm, Jan Elders wrote:
This particular problem has been solved. I removed ndiswrapper 0.8 and reinstalled 0.12 Now the card is functioning well, but ................... after a while I am experiencing exactly the same "freeze" problem that I had with DriverLoader !!!!???????
Where should/could I look for clues ?
I might have hit on the reason the wifi might not work. I had had some problems getting my laptop to fire up the wireless using either Driverloader or ndiswraper. Even with all the correct data in the card, it still wouldnt get its IP. I reinstalled ndiswrapper .12 and did all the finger magic but I still could not get my card to get its ip. Looked at the ndiswrapper lists and found some people with a similar problem who discovered there were extra versions of ndiswrapper.ko lying about. SO, I did a find for ndiswrapper.so and sure enuf it was in three locations. Removed them and reinstalled ndiswrapper. Still no joy. Then I did lsmod and found the Driverloader was still installed. So I did a modprobe -r driverloader and then modprobe ndiswrapper and voila, rcnetwork restart, ifconfig wlan0 up and then dhcpcd wlan0 and it was all working as supposed to. Maybe some modification of my sequency might work for you. Also, during the install of ndiswrapper I got a message saying my kernel didnt have some kind of 4k support so dont complain to ndiswrapper if it freezes. Maybe that is your freeze problem. Just some thoughts. ra -- Old age ain't for Sissies!
Richard wrote:
snip] Also, during the install of ndiswrapper I got a message saying my kernel didnt have some kind of 4k support so dont complain to ndiswrapper if it freezes. Maybe that is your freeze problem.
Windows tends to use a bigger stack than Linux, its mentioned somewhere in the ndiswrapper docs. Therefore to avoid stack overflow the kernel really needs recompiling with a bigger stack allocation. Having said that, since the supplied SuSE ndiswrapper installs without complaining, does that mean they have compiled the default kernel with the bigger stack? -- Tim Nicholson http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this.
On Monday 06 December 2004 12:20 pm, Tim Nicholson wrote:
Windows tends to use a bigger stack than Linux, its mentioned somewhere in the ndiswrapper docs. Therefore to avoid stack overflow the kernel really needs recompiling with a bigger stack allocation.
Having said that, since the supplied SuSE ndiswrapper installs without complaining, does that mean they have compiled the default kernel with the bigger stack?
Not sure, but my guess is it's just a better system and you're having a run of good luck! I ignored the message and mine is working perfectly fine. Go figure. ra -- Old age ain't for Sissies!
participants (4)
-
Jan Elders -
John Andersen -
Richard -
Tim Nicholson