Merge branch 'wireless-2.6' into wireless-next-2.6

Patch "iwlwifi: work around passive scan issue" was merged into
wireless-2.6, but touched a lot of code since modified (and moved)
in wireless-next-2.6. This caused some conflicts.

Conflicts:
	drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-scan.c

Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>

1 files changed, 18 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-lib.c b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-lib.c
index 4bd0aec..a273474 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-lib.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-lib.c
@@ -1395,16 +1395,29 @@ void iwlagn_request_scan(struct iwl_priv *priv)
 			rate = IWL_RATE_1M_PLCP;
 			rate_flags = RATE_MCS_CCK_MSK;
 		}
-		scan->good_CRC_th = 0;
+		scan->good_CRC_th = IWL_GOOD_CRC_TH_DISABLED;
 		break;
 	case IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ:
 		rate = IWL_RATE_6M_PLCP;
 		/*
-		 * If active scaning is requested but a certain channel
-		 * is marked passive, we can do active scanning if we
-		 * detect transmissions.
+		 * If active scanning is requested but a certain channel is
+		 * marked passive, we can do active scanning if we detect
+		 * transmissions.
+		 *
+		 * There is an issue with some firmware versions that triggers
+		 * a sysassert on a "good CRC threshold" of zero (== disabled),
+		 * on a radar channel even though this means that we should NOT
+		 * send probes.
+		 *
+		 * The "good CRC threshold" is the number of frames that we
+		 * need to receive during our dwell time on a channel before
+		 * sending out probes -- setting this to a huge value will
+		 * mean we never reach it, but at the same time work around
+		 * the aforementioned issue. Thus use IWL_GOOD_CRC_TH_NEVER
+		 * here instead of IWL_GOOD_CRC_TH_DISABLED.
 		 */
-		scan->good_CRC_th = is_active ? IWL_GOOD_CRC_TH : 0;
+		scan->good_CRC_th = is_active ? IWL_GOOD_CRC_TH_DEFAULT :
+						IWL_GOOD_CRC_TH_NEVER;
 		break;
 	default:
 		IWL_WARN(priv, "Invalid scan band count\n");