[ath9k-devel] vifs managementRe

[ath9k-devel] vifs managementRe

["Lorna González"]

Hi Joao, 

> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 00:33:27 +0000
> From: Jo?o Maur?cio <joao.goncalves.mauricio@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] vifs management
> To: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
> Cc: ath9k-devel at venema.h4ckr.net, Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se>
> Message-ID:
> 	<AANLkTikMD0OgvcZJAV54aYsdDq_NyQm2+XJ8=6KN76Zd@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> After some testing, I've got the some results as before: when I issue the
> "echo add > ... wiphy" command while I'm associated with some AP on wlan0,
> I
> get deassociated after a few seconds. Also, no interface can get
> associated
> before I issue "echo del=phy ... wiphy" until I've just my primary
> interface. Long story short, I can't make wiphys work. Any thoughts?

Based on my own experience working with phys and vifs. Their functionality depend also on the kernel you are using. In my case, I always need to associate phy0 before creating a new phy, otherwise I can not get an association. Try using other kernel version and power save off for example. 


> What's the real difference between creating wlan0, wlan1, ... wlanN
> "based"
> on phy0, phy1... phyN and wlan0, wlan1, ..., wlanN always "based" on
> phy0??

> Thanks
> 
> 2010/11/4 Jo?o Maur?cio <joao.goncalves.mauricio@gmail.com>
> 
> >  My method assumes that all your stations will be on the same
> >> frequency.  When that is the case, two different VIFS can communicate
> >> to two different APs concurrently.  You do not have to play any
> >> special tricks.
> >>
> >> If you want your VIFs to function on different channels, then you
> >> are going to have to attempt virtual wiphys probably..and my initial
> >> attempt at using them went poorly.

In my opinion, the answer above describes the difference of wlan0...wlanN and phy0...phyN. Vifs are created on mac80211 and phys on your SoftMAC driver. 
You can also read following

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/29500

good luck

Lorna Glez. 



> > Ok, I'll try again to make it work with virtual wiphys and report the
> > outcome later. Shouldn't it be "straightforward" with just 2 virtual
> > interfaces?? Is there any known major issues (my NIC's chipset is the
> > ar9285)?
> >
> > A log with a successful attempt would be marvelous.
> >
> > Thanks
> >


-- 
GMX DSL Doppel-Flat ab 19,99 &euro;/mtl.! Jetzt auch mit 
gratis Notebook-Flat! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl

[ath9k-devel] vifs managementRe

[João Maurício]

Thanks for the advices Lorna. The thing is that when I'm associated with an
AP with wlan0, when I issue "echo add > .../wiphy" I get dissassociated
after +- 10 secs. It happens even if the newly created wlan1 stays down,
i.e., if I just create the wiphy and wait, no "ifconfig wlan1 up" in the
meantime.

Anyone out there with a ar9285 chipset and successful wiphy creation?? With
which compat-wireless drivers and kernel version??

Thanks

2010/11/8 "Lorna Gonz?lez" <lorna.glez@gmx.net>

>
> Hi Joao,
>
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 00:33:27 +0000
> > From: Jo?o Maur?cio <joao.goncalves.mauricio@gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] vifs management
> > To: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
> > Cc: ath9k-devel at venema.h4ckr.net, Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se>
> > Message-ID:
> >       <AANLkTikMD0OgvcZJAV54aYsdDq_NyQm2+XJ8=6KN76Zd@mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> > After some testing, I've got the some results as before: when I issue the
> > "echo add > ... wiphy" command while I'm associated with some AP on
> wlan0,
> > I
> > get deassociated after a few seconds. Also, no interface can get
> > associated
> > before I issue "echo del=phy ... wiphy" until I've just my primary
> > interface. Long story short, I can't make wiphys work. Any thoughts?
>
> Based on my own experience working with phys and vifs. Their functionality
> depend also on the kernel you are using. In my case, I always need to
> associate phy0 before creating a new phy, otherwise I can not get an
> association. Try using other kernel version and power save off for example.
>
>
> > What's the real difference between creating wlan0, wlan1, ... wlanN
> > "based"
> > on phy0, phy1... phyN and wlan0, wlan1, ..., wlanN always "based" on
> > phy0??
>
> > Thanks
> >
> > 2010/11/4 Jo?o Maur?cio <joao.goncalves.mauricio@gmail.com>
> >
> > >  My method assumes that all your stations will be on the same
> > >> frequency.  When that is the case, two different VIFS can communicate
> > >> to two different APs concurrently.  You do not have to play any
> > >> special tricks.
> > >>
> > >> If you want your VIFs to function on different channels, then you
> > >> are going to have to attempt virtual wiphys probably..and my initial
> > >> attempt at using them went poorly.
>
> In my opinion, the answer above describes the difference of wlan0...wlanN
> and phy0...phyN. Vifs are created on mac80211 and phys on your SoftMAC
> driver.
> You can also read following
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/29500
>
> good luck
>
> Lorna Glez.
>
>
>
> > > Ok, I'll try again to make it work with virtual wiphys and report the
> > > outcome later. Shouldn't it be "straightforward" with just 2 virtual
> > > interfaces?? Is there any known major issues (my NIC's chipset is the
> > > ar9285)?
> > >
> > > A log with a successful attempt would be marvelous.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
>
>
> --
> GMX DSL Doppel-Flat ab 19,99 &euro;/mtl.! Jetzt auch mit
> gratis Notebook-Flat! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20101109/0062e7d4/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] vifs managementRe

[Jouni Malinen]

On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 09:16 -0800, Jo?o Maur?cio wrote:
> Thanks for the advices Lorna. The thing is that when I'm associated
> with an AP with wlan0, when I issue "echo add > .../wiphy" I get
> dissassociated after +- 10 secs. It happens even if the newly created
> wlan1 stays down, i.e., if I just create the wiphy and wait, no
> "ifconfig wlan1 up" in the meantime.

Please note that the virtual wiphy within ath9k was an experimental
approach that will hopefully be replaced with mac80211 virtual
interfaces (vif) once mac80211 becomes more aware of multiple channels.
As such, there is very limited interest in maintaining the virtual wiphy
concept or fixing possible regressions in it. I would recommend using
resources to improve mac80211 vif rather than using time with virtual
wiphys.

- Jouni