* [ath9k-devel] multiple virtual ad-hoc interfaces @ 2011-06-23 19:06 gtolon at inti.gob.ar 2011-06-23 21:20 ` Pavel Roskin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: gtolon at inti.gob.ar @ 2011-06-23 19:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel Hi We are trying to use 2 virtual interfaces in ad-hoc mode using the iw utility and an atheros chipset 9285, but we can?t bring up both them. When we try with the second a "device or resource bussy" message appears. Thank you in advance. gtlcm ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] multiple virtual ad-hoc interfaces 2011-06-23 19:06 [ath9k-devel] multiple virtual ad-hoc interfaces gtolon at inti.gob.ar @ 2011-06-23 21:20 ` Pavel Roskin 2011-06-23 23:48 ` Adrian Chadd 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Pavel Roskin @ 2011-06-23 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel On 06/23/2011 03:06 PM, gtolon at inti.gob.ar wrote: > Hi > > We are trying to use 2 virtual interfaces in ad-hoc mode using the iw > utility and an atheros chipset 9285, but we can?t bring up both them. > When we try with the second a "device or resource bussy" message > appears. Thank you in advance. This limitation is intentional. The driver doesn't support more than one ad-hoc interface. From drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c: if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) && sc->nvifs > 0)) { ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface when other" " interfaces already exist.\n"); ret = -EINVAL; goto out; } -- Regards, Pavel Roskin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] multiple virtual ad-hoc interfaces 2011-06-23 21:20 ` Pavel Roskin @ 2011-06-23 23:48 ` Adrian Chadd 2011-06-24 5:18 ` Mohammed Shafi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Adrian Chadd @ 2011-06-23 23:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel Is there a wiki page which describes why, in a way that normal users can (hopefully) understand? (I think I understand why, but I shouldn't be allowed anywhere near user-facing documentation.) Adrian On 24 June 2011 05:20, Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> wrote: > On 06/23/2011 03:06 PM, gtolon at inti.gob.ar wrote: >> Hi >> >> We are trying to use 2 virtual interfaces in ad-hoc mode using the iw >> utility and an atheros chipset 9285, but we can?t bring up both them. >> When we try with the second a "device or resource bussy" message >> appears. Thank you in advance. > > This limitation is intentional. ?The driver doesn't support more than > one ad-hoc interface. ?From drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c: > > if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || > ? ? ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) && > ? ? ?sc->nvifs > 0)) { > ? ? ? ? ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface when other" > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? " interfaces already exist.\n"); > ? ? ? ? ret = -EINVAL; > ? ? ? ? goto out; > } > > -- > Regards, > Pavel Roskin > _______________________________________________ > ath9k-devel mailing list > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] multiple virtual ad-hoc interfaces 2011-06-23 23:48 ` Adrian Chadd @ 2011-06-24 5:18 ` Mohammed Shafi 2011-06-24 6:01 ` Adrian Chadd 2011-07-21 19:45 ` [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions Gabriel Tolón 0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Mohammed Shafi @ 2011-06-24 5:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: > Is there a wiki page which describes why, in a way that normal users > can (hopefully) understand? > > (I think I understand why, but I shouldn't be allowed anywhere near > user-facing documentation.) Hi Adrian, I heard that it is because of the TSF problem we can't have any other interface with an Ad-hoc interface(with inputs from Vasanth). you have any other thoughts. > > > > Adrian > > On 24 June 2011 05:20, Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> wrote: >> On 06/23/2011 03:06 PM, gtolon at inti.gob.ar wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> We are trying to use 2 virtual interfaces in ad-hoc mode using the iw >>> utility and an atheros chipset 9285, but we can?t bring up both them. >>> When we try with the second a "device or resource bussy" message >>> appears. Thank you in advance. >> >> This limitation is intentional. ?The driver doesn't support more than >> one ad-hoc interface. ?From drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c: >> >> if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || >> ? ? ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) && >> ? ? ?sc->nvifs > 0)) { >> ? ? ? ? ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface when other" >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? " interfaces already exist.\n"); >> ? ? ? ? ret = -EINVAL; >> ? ? ? ? goto out; >> } >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Pavel Roskin >> _______________________________________________ >> ath9k-devel mailing list >> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org >> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel >> > _______________________________________________ > ath9k-devel mailing list > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel > -- shafi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] multiple virtual ad-hoc interfaces 2011-06-24 5:18 ` Mohammed Shafi @ 2011-06-24 6:01 ` Adrian Chadd 2011-07-21 19:45 ` [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions Gabriel Tolón 1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Adrian Chadd @ 2011-06-24 6:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel On 24 June 2011 13:18, Mohammed Shafi <shafi.wireless@gmail.com> wrote: > I heard that it is because of the TSF problem we can't have any other > interface with an Ad-hoc interface(with inputs from Vasanth). > you have any other thoughts. I've not done much digging in this area yet, so I'm not sure whether you could possibly keep multiple adhoc TSFs in sync. Felix likely knows better than I. Adrian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions 2011-06-24 5:18 ` Mohammed Shafi 2011-06-24 6:01 ` Adrian Chadd @ 2011-07-21 19:45 ` Gabriel Tolón 2011-07-22 5:03 ` Mohammed Shafi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Gabriel Tolón @ 2011-07-21 19:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel Hi I?ve been using an Atheros 9285 chipset in a 2.6.32-32 kernel with ath9k and two virtual interfaces, one in ad-hoc mode and the other in master mode using hostapd. That configuration worked fine, with some computers connected to the Acces Point and others to the IBSS running in the ad-hoc interface. The only problem was that when bringing up the IBSS (using iw) the interface using hostapd stopped sending beacons, but as far as i understood all kept working thanks to the probe requests and responses. Then i upgraded the ath9k driver using compat wireless-2.6.32.16 and all worked like before. But when i used the ath9k driver of compat wireless-2.6.39-1 i couldn ?t bring the IBSS up when the hostapd was running (i could bring the ad hoc interface up, but not the IBSS with "iw ibss join"). I?d like to know if this configuration is not supported or will not be supported anymore, and if it could be possible to have the AP beaconing together with an IBSS. Thank you! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions 2011-07-21 19:45 ` [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions Gabriel Tolón @ 2011-07-22 5:03 ` Mohammed Shafi 2011-07-22 13:44 ` Gabriel Tolón 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Mohammed Shafi @ 2011-07-22 5:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Gabriel Tol?n <gtolon@inti.gob.ar> wrote: > Hi > > I?ve been using an Atheros 9285 chipset in a 2.6.32-32 kernel with ath9k > and two virtual interfaces, one in ad-hoc mode and the other in master > mode using hostapd. That configuration worked fine, with some computers > connected to the Acces Point and others to the IBSS running in the > ad-hoc interface. The only problem was that when bringing up the IBSS > (using iw) the interface using hostapd stopped sending beacons, but as > far as i understood all kept working thanks to the probe requests and > responses. > > Then i upgraded the ath9k driver using compat wireless-2.6.32.16 and all > worked like before. But when i used the ath9k driver of compat > wireless-2.6.39-1 i couldn ?t bring the IBSS up when the hostapd was > running (i could bring the ad hoc interface up, but not the IBSS with > "iw ibss join"). I?d like to know if this configuration is not supported > or will not be supported anymore, and if it could be possible to have > the AP beaconing together with an IBSS. Thank you! you would have got ? [ 2841.528600] ath: Cannot create ADHOC interface when other interfaces already exist. because of this check in main.c if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) && sc->nvifs > 0)) { ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface when other" " interfaces already exist.\n"); ret = -EINVAL; goto out; } > > > > _______________________________________________ > ath9k-devel mailing list > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel > -- shafi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions 2011-07-22 5:03 ` Mohammed Shafi @ 2011-07-22 13:44 ` Gabriel Tolón 2011-07-22 15:05 ` Mohammed Shafi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Gabriel Tolón @ 2011-07-22 13:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel Thank you for your answer. I?ll put it in two different cases: 1) with the ath9k driver with comes with compat wireless 2.6.39-1: Yes, like you said that ?s the message i get from dmesg when i try to create the ad-hoc interface after another interface is up. However if i first create the ad-hoc interface then i can bring up the original wlan0 and run hostapd on it. But when i try to create an IBSS with "ibss join" i get "device or resource bussy". I don?t know why the order of interface creation/bringing up is important in this case. 2) with older ath9k versions, for example compat wireless 2.6.32-16: In this case i can run hostapd in wlan0 and then create and bring up an ad-hoc interface without problems, furthermore i can join to an ibss with "iw ibss join" and all works fine. The main doubt i have is why the case 2) is not supported anymore, if is something wrong about it. Thank you again. El 22/07/2011 02:03 a.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Gabriel Tol?n<gtolon@inti.gob.ar> wrote: >> Hi >> >> I?ve been using an Atheros 9285 chipset in a 2.6.32-32 kernel with ath9k >> and two virtual interfaces, one in ad-hoc mode and the other in master >> mode using hostapd. That configuration worked fine, with some computers >> connected to the Acces Point and others to the IBSS running in the >> ad-hoc interface. The only problem was that when bringing up the IBSS >> (using iw) the interface using hostapd stopped sending beacons, but as >> far as i understood all kept working thanks to the probe requests and >> responses. >> >> Then i upgraded the ath9k driver using compat wireless-2.6.32.16 and all >> worked like before. But when i used the ath9k driver of compat >> wireless-2.6.39-1 i couldn ?t bring the IBSS up when the hostapd was >> running (i could bring the ad hoc interface up, but not the IBSS with >> "iw ibss join"). I?d like to know if this configuration is not supported >> or will not be supported anymore, and if it could be possible to have >> the AP beaconing together with an IBSS. Thank you! > you would have got ? > [ 2841.528600] ath: Cannot create ADHOC interface when other > interfaces already exist. > > because of this check in main.c > > if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || > ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC)&& > sc->nvifs> 0)) { > ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface when other" > " interfaces already exist.\n"); > ret = -EINVAL; > goto out; > } > > > > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ath9k-devel mailing list >> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org >> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel >> > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions 2011-07-22 13:44 ` Gabriel Tolón @ 2011-07-22 15:05 ` Mohammed Shafi 2011-07-22 19:02 ` Gabriel Tolón 2011-07-29 18:42 ` [ath9k-devel] ath9k version and commits gtolon at inti.gob.ar 0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Mohammed Shafi @ 2011-07-22 15:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Gabriel Tol?n <gtolon@inti.gob.ar> wrote: > Thank you for your answer. I?ll put it in two different cases: > > ?1) with the ath9k driver with comes with compat wireless 2.6.39-1: > > ? ?Yes, like you said that ?s the message i get from dmesg when i try to > create the ad-hoc interface after another interface is up. However if i > first create the ad-hoc interface then i can bring up the original ? ? wlan0 > and run hostapd on it. But when i try to create an IBSS with "ibss join" i > get "device or resource bussy". I don?t know why the order of interface > creation/bringing up is important in this case. this check might be missing there commit 59575d1c717815d62f1b5aeac74e5e60a1b27428 Author: Rajkumar Manoharan <rmanoharan@atheros.com> Date: Mon Apr 4 22:56:16 2011 +0530 ath9k: deny new interface addtion on IBSS mode The present check denies the IBSS interface addtion if we already have any other vifs. But it fails to deny interface addition if IBSS was already present. Signed-off-by: Rajkumar Manoharan <rmanoharan@atheros.com> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> > > ?2) with older ath9k versions, for example compat wireless 2.6.32-16: > > ? ?In this case i can run hostapd in wlan0 and then create and bring up an > ad-hoc interface without problems, furthermore i can join to an ibss with > "iw ibss join" and all works fine. commit 4801416c76a3a355076d6d371c00270dfe332e1c Author: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Date: Sat Jan 15 19:13:48 2011 +0000 ath9k: Fix up hardware mode and beacons with multiple vifs. > > > The main doubt i have is why the case 2) is not supported anymore, if is > something wrong about it. Thank you again. I am not aware of the details, but I think it is because of TSF timer handling in driver > > > > > El 22/07/2011 02:03 a.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: >> >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Gabriel Tol?n<gtolon@inti.gob.ar> ?wrote: >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> I?ve been using an Atheros 9285 chipset in a 2.6.32-32 kernel with ath9k >>> and two virtual interfaces, one in ad-hoc mode and the other in master >>> mode using hostapd. That configuration worked fine, with some computers >>> connected to the Acces Point and others to the IBSS running in the >>> ad-hoc interface. The only problem was that when bringing up the IBSS >>> (using iw) the interface using hostapd stopped sending beacons, but as >>> far as i understood all kept working thanks to the probe requests and >>> responses. >>> >>> Then i upgraded the ath9k driver using compat wireless-2.6.32.16 and all >>> worked like before. But when i used the ath9k driver of compat >>> wireless-2.6.39-1 i couldn ?t bring the IBSS up when the hostapd was >>> running (i could bring the ad hoc interface up, but not the IBSS with >>> "iw ibss join"). I?d like to know if this configuration is not supported >>> or will not be supported anymore, and if it could be possible to have >>> the AP beaconing together with an IBSS. Thank you! >> >> you would have got ? >> [ 2841.528600] ath: Cannot create ADHOC interface when other >> interfaces already exist. >> >> because of this check in main.c >> >> ? if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC)&& >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ?sc->nvifs> ?0)) { >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface when other" >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? " interfaces already exist.\n"); >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ret = -EINVAL; >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? goto out; >> ? ? ? ? } >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ath9k-devel mailing list >>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org >>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel >>> >> >> > > -- shafi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions 2011-07-22 15:05 ` Mohammed Shafi @ 2011-07-22 19:02 ` Gabriel Tolón 2011-07-23 10:31 ` Keith Berkoben 2011-07-29 18:42 ` [ath9k-devel] ath9k version and commits gtolon at inti.gob.ar 1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Gabriel Tolón @ 2011-07-22 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel Ok, i guess i can find that commits and comments on the wireless-testing git. i?ll dig into the code and the 80211 standard to analyze the beaconing problem also. Your answers have been very useful. Regards El 22/07/2011 12:05 p.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Gabriel Tol?n<gtolon@inti.gob.ar> wrote: >> Thank you for your answer. I?ll put it in two different cases: >> >> 1) with the ath9k driver with comes with compat wireless 2.6.39-1: >> >> Yes, like you said that ?s the message i get from dmesg when i try to >> create the ad-hoc interface after another interface is up. However if i >> first create the ad-hoc interface then i can bring up the original wlan0 >> and run hostapd on it. But when i try to create an IBSS with "ibss join" i >> get "device or resource bussy". I don?t know why the order of interface >> creation/bringing up is important in this case. > this check might be missing there > > commit 59575d1c717815d62f1b5aeac74e5e60a1b27428 > Author: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan@atheros.com> > Date: Mon Apr 4 22:56:16 2011 +0530 > > ath9k: deny new interface addtion on IBSS mode > > The present check denies the IBSS interface addtion if we > already have any other vifs. But it fails to deny interface > addition if IBSS was already present. > > Signed-off-by: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan@atheros.com> > Signed-off-by: John W. Linville<linville@tuxdriver.com> > >> 2) with older ath9k versions, for example compat wireless 2.6.32-16: >> >> In this case i can run hostapd in wlan0 and then create and bring up an >> ad-hoc interface without problems, furthermore i can join to an ibss with >> "iw ibss join" and all works fine. > commit 4801416c76a3a355076d6d371c00270dfe332e1c > Author: Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com> > Date: Sat Jan 15 19:13:48 2011 +0000 > > ath9k: Fix up hardware mode and beacons with multiple vifs. > >> >> The main doubt i have is why the case 2) is not supported anymore, if is >> something wrong about it. Thank you again. > I am not aware of the details, but I think it is because of TSF timer > handling in driver >> >> >> >> El 22/07/2011 02:03 a.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: >>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Gabriel Tol?n<gtolon@inti.gob.ar> wrote: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> I?ve been using an Atheros 9285 chipset in a 2.6.32-32 kernel with ath9k >>>> and two virtual interfaces, one in ad-hoc mode and the other in master >>>> mode using hostapd. That configuration worked fine, with some computers >>>> connected to the Acces Point and others to the IBSS running in the >>>> ad-hoc interface. The only problem was that when bringing up the IBSS >>>> (using iw) the interface using hostapd stopped sending beacons, but as >>>> far as i understood all kept working thanks to the probe requests and >>>> responses. >>>> >>>> Then i upgraded the ath9k driver using compat wireless-2.6.32.16 and all >>>> worked like before. But when i used the ath9k driver of compat >>>> wireless-2.6.39-1 i couldn ?t bring the IBSS up when the hostapd was >>>> running (i could bring the ad hoc interface up, but not the IBSS with >>>> "iw ibss join"). I?d like to know if this configuration is not supported >>>> or will not be supported anymore, and if it could be possible to have >>>> the AP beaconing together with an IBSS. Thank you! >>> you would have got ? >>> [ 2841.528600] ath: Cannot create ADHOC interface when other >>> interfaces already exist. >>> >>> because of this check in main.c >>> >>> if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || >>> ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC)&& >>> sc->nvifs> 0)) { >>> ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface when other" >>> " interfaces already exist.\n"); >>> ret = -EINVAL; >>> goto out; >>> } >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ath9k-devel mailing list >>>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org >>>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel >>>> >>> >> > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions 2011-07-22 19:02 ` Gabriel Tolón @ 2011-07-23 10:31 ` Keith Berkoben 2011-08-25 19:46 ` gtolon at inti.gob.ar 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Keith Berkoben @ 2011-07-23 10:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel Not sure if this is useful info, but seeing this thread I just tried creating an ap+adhoc device with openwrt on a linksys wrt160nl ( atheros 9xxx, compat-wireless 2011-06-22, 2.6.39.2 kernel, openwrt 27724). I created the interfaces using openwrt's uci abstraction. Both virtual interfaces work fine. I get G+ speeds (24-25Mbps, real) on the adhoc alone, 11Mbps from a STA all the way through and 28Mbps STA-AP. The only thing I noticed that was strange is that hiding the ESSID for the adhoc network had no effect (SSID was still advertised) ~Keith On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Gabriel Tol?n <gtolon@inti.gob.ar> wrote: > Ok, i guess i can find that commits and comments on the wireless-testing > git. i?ll dig into the code and the 80211 standard to analyze the > beaconing problem also. Your answers have been very useful. > > Regards > > > El 22/07/2011 12:05 p.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Gabriel Tol?n<gtolon@inti.gob.ar> > wrote: > >> Thank you for your answer. I?ll put it in two different cases: > >> > >> 1) with the ath9k driver with comes with compat wireless 2.6.39-1: > >> > >> Yes, like you said that ?s the message i get from dmesg when i try > to > >> create the ad-hoc interface after another interface is up. However if i > >> first create the ad-hoc interface then i can bring up the original > wlan0 > >> and run hostapd on it. But when i try to create an IBSS with "ibss join" > i > >> get "device or resource bussy". I don?t know why the order of interface > >> creation/bringing up is important in this case. > > this check might be missing there > > > > commit 59575d1c717815d62f1b5aeac74e5e60a1b27428 > > Author: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan@atheros.com> > > Date: Mon Apr 4 22:56:16 2011 +0530 > > > > ath9k: deny new interface addtion on IBSS mode > > > > The present check denies the IBSS interface addtion if we > > already have any other vifs. But it fails to deny interface > > addition if IBSS was already present. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan@atheros.com> > > Signed-off-by: John W. Linville<linville@tuxdriver.com> > > > >> 2) with older ath9k versions, for example compat wireless 2.6.32-16: > >> > >> In this case i can run hostapd in wlan0 and then create and bring up > an > >> ad-hoc interface without problems, furthermore i can join to an ibss > with > >> "iw ibss join" and all works fine. > > commit 4801416c76a3a355076d6d371c00270dfe332e1c > > Author: Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com> > > Date: Sat Jan 15 19:13:48 2011 +0000 > > > > ath9k: Fix up hardware mode and beacons with multiple vifs. > > > >> > >> The main doubt i have is why the case 2) is not supported anymore, if is > >> something wrong about it. Thank you again. > > I am not aware of the details, but I think it is because of TSF timer > > handling in driver > >> > >> > >> > >> El 22/07/2011 02:03 a.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: > >>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Gabriel Tol?n<gtolon@inti.gob.ar> > wrote: > >>>> Hi > >>>> > >>>> I?ve been using an Atheros 9285 chipset in a 2.6.32-32 kernel with > ath9k > >>>> and two virtual interfaces, one in ad-hoc mode and the other in master > >>>> mode using hostapd. That configuration worked fine, with some > computers > >>>> connected to the Acces Point and others to the IBSS running in the > >>>> ad-hoc interface. The only problem was that when bringing up the IBSS > >>>> (using iw) the interface using hostapd stopped sending beacons, but as > >>>> far as i understood all kept working thanks to the probe requests and > >>>> responses. > >>>> > >>>> Then i upgraded the ath9k driver using compat wireless-2.6.32.16 and > all > >>>> worked like before. But when i used the ath9k driver of compat > >>>> wireless-2.6.39-1 i couldn ?t bring the IBSS up when the hostapd was > >>>> running (i could bring the ad hoc interface up, but not the IBSS with > >>>> "iw ibss join"). I?d like to know if this configuration is not > supported > >>>> or will not be supported anymore, and if it could be possible to have > >>>> the AP beaconing together with an IBSS. Thank you! > >>> you would have got ? > >>> [ 2841.528600] ath: Cannot create ADHOC interface when other > >>> interfaces already exist. > >>> > >>> because of this check in main.c > >>> > >>> if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || > >>> ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC)&& > >>> sc->nvifs> 0)) { > >>> ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface when > other" > >>> " interfaces already exist.\n"); > >>> ret = -EINVAL; > >>> goto out; > >>> } > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> ath9k-devel mailing list > >>>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org > >>>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ath9k-devel mailing list > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110723/5d4e7000/attachment.htm ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions 2011-07-23 10:31 ` Keith Berkoben @ 2011-08-25 19:46 ` gtolon at inti.gob.ar 2011-08-25 19:51 ` Keith Berkoben 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: gtolon at inti.gob.ar @ 2011-08-25 19:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel Hi Keith, i want to start using openwrt. I've been reading the wiki and documentation from openwrt.org and i found how to build different drivers and packages using svn and menuconfig, but i haven't found how to build compat-wireless. I would appreciate some help on this topic. Thank you El 23/07/2011 07:31 a.m., Keith Berkoben escribi?: > Not sure if this is useful info, but seeing this thread I just tried > creating an ap+adhoc device with openwrt on a linksys wrt160nl ( atheros > 9xxx, compat-wireless 2011-06-22, 2.6.39.2 kernel, openwrt 27724). > > I created the interfaces using openwrt's uci abstraction. Both virtual > interfaces work fine. I get G+ speeds (24-25Mbps, real) on the adhoc > alone, 11Mbps from a STA all the way through and 28Mbps STA-AP. > > The only thing I noticed that was strange is that hiding the ESSID for > the adhoc network had no effect (SSID was still advertised) > > ~Keith > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Gabriel Tol?n <gtolon@inti.gob.ar > <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar>> wrote: > > Ok, i guess i can find that commits and comments on the wireless-testing > git. i?ll dig into the code and the 80211 standard to analyze the > beaconing problem also. Your answers have been very useful. > > Regards > > > El 22/07/2011 12:05 p.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Gabriel Tol?n<gtolon@inti.gob.ar > <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar>> wrote: > >> Thank you for your answer. I?ll put it in two different cases: > >> > >> 1) with the ath9k driver with comes with compat wireless 2.6.39-1: > >> > >> Yes, like you said that ?s the message i get from dmesg when > i try to > >> create the ad-hoc interface after another interface is up. > However if i > >> first create the ad-hoc interface then i can bring up the > original wlan0 > >> and run hostapd on it. But when i try to create an IBSS with > "ibss join" i > >> get "device or resource bussy". I don?t know why the order of > interface > >> creation/bringing up is important in this case. > > this check might be missing there > > > > commit 59575d1c717815d62f1b5aeac74e5e60a1b27428 > > Author: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan@atheros.com > <mailto:rmanoharan@atheros.com>> > > Date: Mon Apr 4 22:56:16 2011 +0530 > > > > ath9k: deny new interface addtion on IBSS mode > > > > The present check denies the IBSS interface addtion if we > > already have any other vifs. But it fails to deny interface > > addition if IBSS was already present. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan@atheros.com > <mailto:rmanoharan@atheros.com>> > > Signed-off-by: John W. Linville<linville@tuxdriver.com > <mailto:linville@tuxdriver.com>> > > > >> 2) with older ath9k versions, for example compat wireless > 2.6.32-16: > >> > >> In this case i can run hostapd in wlan0 and then create and > bring up an > >> ad-hoc interface without problems, furthermore i can join to an > ibss with > >> "iw ibss join" and all works fine. > > commit 4801416c76a3a355076d6d371c00270dfe332e1c > > Author: Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com > <mailto:greearb@candelatech.com>> > > Date: Sat Jan 15 19:13:48 2011 +0000 > > > > ath9k: Fix up hardware mode and beacons with multiple vifs. > > > >> > >> The main doubt i have is why the case 2) is not supported > anymore, if is > >> something wrong about it. Thank you again. > > I am not aware of the details, but I think it is because of TSF timer > > handling in driver > >> > >> > >> > >> El 22/07/2011 02:03 a.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: > >>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Gabriel > Tol?n<gtolon at inti.gob.ar <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar>> wrote: > >>>> Hi > >>>> > >>>> I?ve been using an Atheros 9285 chipset in a 2.6.32-32 kernel > with ath9k > >>>> and two virtual interfaces, one in ad-hoc mode and the other > in master > >>>> mode using hostapd. That configuration worked fine, with some > computers > >>>> connected to the Acces Point and others to the IBSS running in the > >>>> ad-hoc interface. The only problem was that when bringing up > the IBSS > >>>> (using iw) the interface using hostapd stopped sending > beacons, but as > >>>> far as i understood all kept working thanks to the probe > requests and > >>>> responses. > >>>> > >>>> Then i upgraded the ath9k driver using compat > wireless-2.6.32.16 and all > >>>> worked like before. But when i used the ath9k driver of compat > >>>> wireless-2.6.39-1 i couldn ?t bring the IBSS up when the > hostapd was > >>>> running (i could bring the ad hoc interface up, but not the > IBSS with > >>>> "iw ibss join"). I?d like to know if this configuration is not > supported > >>>> or will not be supported anymore, and if it could be possible > to have > >>>> the AP beaconing together with an IBSS. Thank you! > >>> you would have got ? > >>> [ 2841.528600] ath: Cannot create ADHOC interface when other > >>> interfaces already exist. > >>> > >>> because of this check in main.c > >>> > >>> if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || > >>> ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC)&& > >>> sc->nvifs> 0)) { > >>> ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface > when other" > >>> " interfaces already exist.\n"); > >>> ret = -EINVAL; > >>> goto out; > >>> } > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> ath9k-devel mailing list > >>>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org <mailto:ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org> > >>>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ath9k-devel mailing list > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org <mailto:ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org> > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions 2011-08-25 19:46 ` gtolon at inti.gob.ar @ 2011-08-25 19:51 ` Keith Berkoben 2011-08-26 12:30 ` gtolon at inti.gob.ar 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Keith Berkoben @ 2011-08-25 19:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel Hey Gabriel, Openwrt already uses compat-wireless by default when you select the ath9k driver. The version is defined in the makefile for mac80211: https://dev.openwrt.org/browser/trunk/package/mac80211/Makefile I've never tried to build in a version other than what's defined by default, but I don't see why you couldn't change it to point at a custom/prerelease version. ~Keith On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:46 PM, <gtolon@inti.gob.ar> wrote: > Hi Keith, i want to start using openwrt. I've been reading the wiki and > documentation from openwrt.org and i found how to build different drivers > and packages using svn and menuconfig, but i haven't found how to build > compat-wireless. I would appreciate some help on this topic. Thank you > > > > El 23/07/2011 07:31 a.m., Keith Berkoben escribi?: > >> Not sure if this is useful info, but seeing this thread I just tried >> >> creating an ap+adhoc device with openwrt on a linksys wrt160nl ( atheros >> 9xxx, compat-wireless 2011-06-22, 2.6.39.2 kernel, openwrt 27724). >> >> I created the interfaces using openwrt's uci abstraction. Both virtual >> interfaces work fine. I get G+ speeds (24-25Mbps, real) on the adhoc >> alone, 11Mbps from a STA all the way through and 28Mbps STA-AP. >> >> The only thing I noticed that was strange is that hiding the ESSID for >> the adhoc network had no effect (SSID was still advertised) >> >> ~Keith >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Gabriel Tol?n <gtolon@inti.gob.ar >> <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar>> wrote: >> >> Ok, i guess i can find that commits and comments on the >> wireless-testing >> git. i?ll dig into the code and the 80211 standard to analyze the >> beaconing problem also. Your answers have been very useful. >> >> Regards >> >> >> El 22/07/2011 12:05 p.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: >> > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Gabriel Tol?n<gtolon@inti.gob.ar >> <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar>> wrote: >> >> >> Thank you for your answer. I?ll put it in two different cases: >> >> >> >> 1) with the ath9k driver with comes with compat wireless >> 2.6.39-1: >> >> >> >> Yes, like you said that ?s the message i get from dmesg when >> i try to >> >> create the ad-hoc interface after another interface is up. >> However if i >> >> first create the ad-hoc interface then i can bring up the >> original wlan0 >> >> and run hostapd on it. But when i try to create an IBSS with >> "ibss join" i >> >> get "device or resource bussy". I don?t know why the order of >> interface >> >> creation/bringing up is important in this case. >> > this check might be missing there >> > >> > commit 59575d1c717815d62f1b5aeac74e5e**60a1b27428 >> > Author: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan at atheros.**com<rmanoharan@atheros.com> >> <mailto:rmanoharan@atheros.com**>> >> >> > Date: Mon Apr 4 22:56:16 2011 +0530 >> > >> > ath9k: deny new interface addtion on IBSS mode >> > >> > The present check denies the IBSS interface addtion if we >> > already have any other vifs. But it fails to deny interface >> > addition if IBSS was already present. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan at atheros.**com<rmanoharan@atheros.com> >> <mailto:rmanoharan@atheros.com**>> >> >> > Signed-off-by: John W. Linville<linville at tuxdriver.**com<linville@tuxdriver.com> >> <mailto:linville@tuxdriver.com**>> >> >> > >> >> 2) with older ath9k versions, for example compat wireless >> 2.6.32-16: >> >> >> >> In this case i can run hostapd in wlan0 and then create and >> bring up an >> >> ad-hoc interface without problems, furthermore i can join to an >> ibss with >> >> "iw ibss join" and all works fine. >> > commit 4801416c76a3a355076d6d371c0027**0dfe332e1c >> > Author: Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com >> <mailto:greearb at candelatech.**com <greearb@candelatech.com>>> >> >> > Date: Sat Jan 15 19:13:48 2011 +0000 >> > >> > ath9k: Fix up hardware mode and beacons with multiple vifs. >> > >> >> >> >> The main doubt i have is why the case 2) is not supported >> anymore, if is >> >> something wrong about it. Thank you again. >> > I am not aware of the details, but I think it is because of TSF >> timer >> > handling in driver >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> El 22/07/2011 02:03 a.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: >> >>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Gabriel >> Tol?n<gtolon at inti.gob.ar <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar>> wrote: >> >> >>>> Hi >> >>>> >> >>>> I?ve been using an Atheros 9285 chipset in a 2.6.32-32 kernel >> with ath9k >> >>>> and two virtual interfaces, one in ad-hoc mode and the other >> in master >> >>>> mode using hostapd. That configuration worked fine, with some >> computers >> >>>> connected to the Acces Point and others to the IBSS running in >> the >> >>>> ad-hoc interface. The only problem was that when bringing up >> the IBSS >> >>>> (using iw) the interface using hostapd stopped sending >> beacons, but as >> >>>> far as i understood all kept working thanks to the probe >> requests and >> >>>> responses. >> >>>> >> >>>> Then i upgraded the ath9k driver using compat >> wireless-2.6.32.16 and all >> >>>> worked like before. But when i used the ath9k driver of compat >> >>>> wireless-2.6.39-1 i couldn ?t bring the IBSS up when the >> hostapd was >> >>>> running (i could bring the ad hoc interface up, but not the >> IBSS with >> >>>> "iw ibss join"). I?d like to know if this configuration is not >> supported >> >>>> or will not be supported anymore, and if it could be possible >> to have >> >>>> the AP beaconing together with an IBSS. Thank you! >> >>> you would have got ? >> >>> [ 2841.528600] ath: Cannot create ADHOC interface when other >> >>> interfaces already exist. >> >>> >> >>> because of this check in main.c >> >>> >> >>> if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || >> >>> ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC)&& >> >>> sc->nvifs> 0)) { >> >>> ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface >> when other" >> >>> " interfaces already exist.\n"); >> >>> ret = -EINVAL; >> >>> goto out; >> >>> } >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>>> ______________________________**_________________ >> >>>> ath9k-devel mailing list >> >>>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org <mailto:ath9k-devel@lists.** >> ath9k.org <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>> >> >> >>>> https://lists.ath9k.org/**mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel<https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> > >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> ath9k-devel mailing list >> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org <mailto:ath9k-devel at lists.**ath9k.org<ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org> >> > >> >> https://lists.ath9k.org/**mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel<https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110825/0c9e552d/attachment-0001.htm ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions 2011-08-25 19:51 ` Keith Berkoben @ 2011-08-26 12:30 ` gtolon at inti.gob.ar 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: gtolon at inti.gob.ar @ 2011-08-26 12:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel Thank you very much. I'll try that way and see what happens. Best regards El 25/08/2011 04:51 p.m., Keith Berkoben escribi?: > Hey Gabriel, > > Openwrt already uses compat-wireless by default when you select the > ath9k driver. The version is defined in the makefile for mac80211: > https://dev.openwrt.org/browser/trunk/package/mac80211/Makefile > > I've never tried to build in a version other than what's defined by > default, but I don't see why you couldn't change it to point at a > custom/prerelease version. > > ~Keith > > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:46 PM, <gtolon@inti.gob.ar > <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar>> wrote: > > Hi Keith, i want to start using openwrt. I've been reading the wiki > and documentation from openwrt.org <http://openwrt.org> and i found > how to build different drivers and packages using svn and > menuconfig, but i haven't found how to build compat-wireless. I > would appreciate some help on this topic. Thank you > > > > El 23/07/2011 07:31 a.m., Keith Berkoben escribi?: > > Not sure if this is useful info, but seeing this thread I just tried > > creating an ap+adhoc device with openwrt on a linksys wrt160nl ( > atheros > 9xxx, compat-wireless 2011-06-22, 2.6.39.2 kernel, openwrt 27724). > > I created the interfaces using openwrt's uci abstraction. Both > virtual > interfaces work fine. I get G+ speeds (24-25Mbps, real) on the > adhoc > alone, 11Mbps from a STA all the way through and 28Mbps STA-AP. > > The only thing I noticed that was strange is that hiding the > ESSID for > the adhoc network had no effect (SSID was still advertised) > > ~Keith > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Gabriel Tol?n > <gtolon at inti.gob.ar <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar> > <mailto:gtolon at inti.gob.ar <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar>>> wrote: > > Ok, i guess i can find that commits and comments on the > wireless-testing > git. i?ll dig into the code and the 80211 standard to > analyze the > beaconing problem also. Your answers have been very useful. > > Regards > > > El 22/07/2011 12:05 p.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Gabriel > Tol?n<gtolon at inti.gob.ar <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar> > <mailto:gtolon at inti.gob.ar <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar>>> wrote: > > >> Thank you for your answer. I?ll put it in two different cases: > >> > >> 1) with the ath9k driver with comes with compat wireless > 2.6.39-1: > >> > >> Yes, like you said that ?s the message i get from dmesg when > i try to > >> create the ad-hoc interface after another interface is up. > However if i > >> first create the ad-hoc interface then i can bring up the > original wlan0 > >> and run hostapd on it. But when i try to create an IBSS with > "ibss join" i > >> get "device or resource bussy". I don?t know why the order of > interface > >> creation/bringing up is important in this case. > > this check might be missing there > > > > commit 59575d1c717815d62f1b5aeac74e5e__60a1b27428 > > Author: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan@atheros.__com > <mailto:rmanoharan@atheros.com> > <mailto:rmanoharan at atheros.com <mailto:rmanoharan@atheros.com>__>> > > > Date: Mon Apr 4 22:56:16 2011 +0530 > > > > ath9k: deny new interface addtion on IBSS mode > > > > The present check denies the IBSS interface addtion if we > > already have any other vifs. But it fails to deny interface > > addition if IBSS was already present. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rajkumar > Manoharan<rmanoharan at atheros.__com <mailto:rmanoharan@atheros.com> > <mailto:rmanoharan at atheros.com <mailto:rmanoharan@atheros.com>__>> > > > Signed-off-by: John W. Linville<linville@tuxdriver.__com > <mailto:linville@tuxdriver.com> > <mailto:linville at tuxdriver.com <mailto:linville@tuxdriver.com>__>> > > > > >> 2) with older ath9k versions, for example compat wireless > 2.6.32-16: > >> > >> In this case i can run hostapd in wlan0 and then create and > bring up an > >> ad-hoc interface without problems, furthermore i can join to an > ibss with > >> "iw ibss join" and all works fine. > > commit 4801416c76a3a355076d6d371c0027__0dfe332e1c > > Author: Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com > <mailto:greearb@candelatech.com> > <mailto:greearb at candelatech.__com <mailto:greearb@candelatech.com>>> > > > Date: Sat Jan 15 19:13:48 2011 +0000 > > > > ath9k: Fix up hardware mode and beacons with multiple vifs. > > > >> > >> The main doubt i have is why the case 2) is not supported > anymore, if is > >> something wrong about it. Thank you again. > > I am not aware of the details, but I think it is because of > TSF timer > > handling in driver > >> > >> > >> > >> El 22/07/2011 02:03 a.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: > >>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Gabriel > Tol?n<gtolon at inti.gob.ar <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar> > <mailto:gtolon at inti.gob.ar <mailto:gtolon@inti.gob.ar>>> wrote: > > >>>> Hi > >>>> > >>>> I?ve been using an Atheros 9285 chipset in a 2.6.32-32 kernel > with ath9k > >>>> and two virtual interfaces, one in ad-hoc mode and the other > in master > >>>> mode using hostapd. That configuration worked fine, with some > computers > >>>> connected to the Acces Point and others to the IBSS > running in the > >>>> ad-hoc interface. The only problem was that when bringing up > the IBSS > >>>> (using iw) the interface using hostapd stopped sending > beacons, but as > >>>> far as i understood all kept working thanks to the probe > requests and > >>>> responses. > >>>> > >>>> Then i upgraded the ath9k driver using compat > wireless-2.6.32.16 and all > >>>> worked like before. But when i used the ath9k driver of compat > >>>> wireless-2.6.39-1 i couldn ?t bring the IBSS up when the > hostapd was > >>>> running (i could bring the ad hoc interface up, but not the > IBSS with > >>>> "iw ibss join"). I?d like to know if this configuration is not > supported > >>>> or will not be supported anymore, and if it could be possible > to have > >>>> the AP beaconing together with an IBSS. Thank you! > >>> you would have got ? > >>> [ 2841.528600] ath: Cannot create ADHOC interface when other > >>> interfaces already exist. > >>> > >>> because of this check in main.c > >>> > >>> if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || > >>> ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC)&& > >>> sc->nvifs> 0)) { > >>> ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface > when other" > >>> " interfaces already exist.\n"); > >>> ret = -EINVAL; > >>> goto out; > >>> } > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> _________________________________________________ > >>>> ath9k-devel mailing list > >>>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org > <mailto:ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org> > <mailto:ath9k-devel@lists.__ath9k.org > <mailto:ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>> > > >>>> https://lists.ath9k.org/__mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel > <https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > _________________________________________________ > ath9k-devel mailing list > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org <mailto:ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org> > <mailto:ath9k-devel@lists.__ath9k.org > <mailto:ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>> > > https://lists.ath9k.org/__mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel > <https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel> > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] ath9k version and commits 2011-07-22 15:05 ` Mohammed Shafi 2011-07-22 19:02 ` Gabriel Tolón @ 2011-07-29 18:42 ` gtolon at inti.gob.ar 1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: gtolon at inti.gob.ar @ 2011-07-29 18:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath9k-devel Hi, i was looking into the wireless-testing git, and i don?t understand the relationship between the different commits and the srcversion of the ath9k drivers. For example i have the srcversion 3D4208C725AB8FBF6E5A21B, and i couldn?t find that number in the wireless-testing ath9k git commits. I?d like to relate the different commit comments to the srcversions. Sorry if this is too basic but i?ve been searching for documentation about this without success. El 22/07/2011 12:05 p.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Gabriel Tol?n<gtolon@inti.gob.ar> wrote: >> Thank you for your answer. I?ll put it in two different cases: >> >> 1) with the ath9k driver with comes with compat wireless 2.6.39-1: >> >> Yes, like you said that ?s the message i get from dmesg when i try to >> create the ad-hoc interface after another interface is up. However if i >> first create the ad-hoc interface then i can bring up the original wlan0 >> and run hostapd on it. But when i try to create an IBSS with "ibss join" i >> get "device or resource bussy". I don?t know why the order of interface >> creation/bringing up is important in this case. > this check might be missing there > > commit 59575d1c717815d62f1b5aeac74e5e60a1b27428 > Author: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan@atheros.com> > Date: Mon Apr 4 22:56:16 2011 +0530 > > ath9k: deny new interface addtion on IBSS mode > > The present check denies the IBSS interface addtion if we > already have any other vifs. But it fails to deny interface > addition if IBSS was already present. > > Signed-off-by: Rajkumar Manoharan<rmanoharan@atheros.com> > Signed-off-by: John W. Linville<linville@tuxdriver.com> > >> 2) with older ath9k versions, for example compat wireless 2.6.32-16: >> >> In this case i can run hostapd in wlan0 and then create and bring up an >> ad-hoc interface without problems, furthermore i can join to an ibss with >> "iw ibss join" and all works fine. > commit 4801416c76a3a355076d6d371c00270dfe332e1c > Author: Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com> > Date: Sat Jan 15 19:13:48 2011 +0000 > > ath9k: Fix up hardware mode and beacons with multiple vifs. > >> >> The main doubt i have is why the case 2) is not supported anymore, if is >> something wrong about it. Thank you again. > I am not aware of the details, but I think it is because of TSF timer > handling in driver >> >> >> >> El 22/07/2011 02:03 a.m., Mohammed Shafi escribi?: >>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Gabriel Tol?n<gtolon@inti.gob.ar> wrote: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> I?ve been using an Atheros 9285 chipset in a 2.6.32-32 kernel with ath9k >>>> and two virtual interfaces, one in ad-hoc mode and the other in master >>>> mode using hostapd. That configuration worked fine, with some computers >>>> connected to the Acces Point and others to the IBSS running in the >>>> ad-hoc interface. The only problem was that when bringing up the IBSS >>>> (using iw) the interface using hostapd stopped sending beacons, but as >>>> far as i understood all kept working thanks to the probe requests and >>>> responses. >>>> >>>> Then i upgraded the ath9k driver using compat wireless-2.6.32.16 and all >>>> worked like before. But when i used the ath9k driver of compat >>>> wireless-2.6.39-1 i couldn ?t bring the IBSS up when the hostapd was >>>> running (i could bring the ad hoc interface up, but not the IBSS with >>>> "iw ibss join"). I?d like to know if this configuration is not supported >>>> or will not be supported anymore, and if it could be possible to have >>>> the AP beaconing together with an IBSS. Thank you! >>> you would have got ? >>> [ 2841.528600] ath: Cannot create ADHOC interface when other >>> interfaces already exist. >>> >>> because of this check in main.c >>> >>> if ((ah->opmode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) || >>> ((vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC)&& >>> sc->nvifs> 0)) { >>> ath_err(common, "Cannot create ADHOC interface when other" >>> " interfaces already exist.\n"); >>> ret = -EINVAL; >>> goto out; >>> } >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ath9k-devel mailing list >>>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org >>>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel >>>> >>> >> > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-08-26 12:30 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2011-06-23 19:06 [ath9k-devel] multiple virtual ad-hoc interfaces gtolon at inti.gob.ar 2011-06-23 21:20 ` Pavel Roskin 2011-06-23 23:48 ` Adrian Chadd 2011-06-24 5:18 ` Mohammed Shafi 2011-06-24 6:01 ` Adrian Chadd 2011-07-21 19:45 ` [ath9k-devel] AP + IBSS in different ath9k versions Gabriel Tolón 2011-07-22 5:03 ` Mohammed Shafi 2011-07-22 13:44 ` Gabriel Tolón 2011-07-22 15:05 ` Mohammed Shafi 2011-07-22 19:02 ` Gabriel Tolón 2011-07-23 10:31 ` Keith Berkoben 2011-08-25 19:46 ` gtolon at inti.gob.ar 2011-08-25 19:51 ` Keith Berkoben 2011-08-26 12:30 ` gtolon at inti.gob.ar 2011-07-29 18:42 ` [ath9k-devel] ath9k version and commits gtolon at inti.gob.ar
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.