* [PATCH 1/2] mac80211: Make beacon-loss-count configurable.
@ 2013-03-19 21:19 greearb
2013-03-19 21:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] mac80211: Make un-found-rate splat a warn-once greearb
2013-03-22 10:31 ` [PATCH 1/2] mac80211: Make beacon-loss-count configurable Johannes Berg
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: greearb @ 2013-03-19 21:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-wireless; +Cc: Ben Greear
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
On loaded systems with lots of VIFs, I see lots of beacon
timeouts, even though the connection to the AP is very
good. Allow tuning the beacon-loss-count variable to
give the system longer to process beacons if the user
prefers.
Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
---
:100644 100644 da805e2... 1f1e889... M net/mac80211/mlme.c
net/mac80211/mlme.c | 7 +++++--
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/mac80211/mlme.c b/net/mac80211/mlme.c
index da805e2..1f1e889 100644
--- a/net/mac80211/mlme.c
+++ b/net/mac80211/mlme.c
@@ -54,7 +54,10 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(max_probe_tries,
* probe on beacon miss before declaring the connection lost
* default to what we want.
*/
-#define IEEE80211_BEACON_LOSS_COUNT 7
+static int beacon_loss_count = 7;
+module_param(beacon_loss_count, int, 0644);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(beacon_loss_count,
+ "Number of beacon intervals before we decide beacon was lost.");
/*
* Time the connection can be idle before we probe
@@ -1319,7 +1322,7 @@ static void ieee80211_set_associated(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata,
bss_conf->assoc_capability, bss->has_erp_value, bss->erp_value);
sdata->u.mgd.beacon_timeout = usecs_to_jiffies(ieee80211_tu_to_usec(
- IEEE80211_BEACON_LOSS_COUNT * bss_conf->beacon_int));
+ beacon_loss_count * bss_conf->beacon_int));
sdata->u.mgd.associated = cbss;
memcpy(sdata->u.mgd.bssid, cbss->bssid, ETH_ALEN);
--
1.7.3.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] mac80211: Make un-found-rate splat a warn-once.
2013-03-19 21:19 [PATCH 1/2] mac80211: Make beacon-loss-count configurable greearb
@ 2013-03-19 21:19 ` greearb
2013-03-22 10:28 ` Johannes Berg
2013-03-22 10:31 ` [PATCH 1/2] mac80211: Make beacon-loss-count configurable Johannes Berg
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: greearb @ 2013-03-19 21:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-wireless; +Cc: Ben Greear
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
After that, print it out with net_ratelimit. We saw a system
continually hit this warning, for reasons unknown, and it
seems it bogged the system down enough to make it go OOM.
Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
---
:100644 100644 e03a8e9... 2eab7d8... M net/mac80211/tx.c
net/mac80211/tx.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++-------
1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/mac80211/tx.c b/net/mac80211/tx.c
index e03a8e9..2eab7d8 100644
--- a/net/mac80211/tx.c
+++ b/net/mac80211/tx.c
@@ -672,14 +672,26 @@ ieee80211_tx_h_rate_ctrl(struct ieee80211_tx_data *tx)
* Lets not bother rate control if we're associated and cannot
* talk to the sta. This should not happen.
*/
- if (WARN(test_bit(SCAN_SW_SCANNING, &tx->local->scanning) && assoc &&
- !rate_usable_index_exists(sband, &tx->sta->sta),
- "%s: Dropped data frame as no usable bitrate found while "
- "scanning and associated. Target station: "
- "%pM on %d GHz band\n",
- tx->sdata->name, hdr->addr1,
- info->band ? 5 : 2))
+ if (test_bit(SCAN_SW_SCANNING, &tx->local->scanning) && assoc &&
+ !rate_usable_index_exists(sband, &tx->sta->sta)) {
+ static bool do_once = true;
+ if (do_once) {
+ WARN(1, "%s: Dropped data frame as no usable bitrate found while "
+ "scanning and associated. Target station: "
+ "%pM on %d GHz band\n",
+ tx->sdata->name, hdr->addr1,
+ info->band ? 5 : 2);
+ do_once = false;
+ }
+ else {
+ net_info_ratelimited("%s: Dropped data frame as no usable bitrate found while "
+ "scanning and associated. Target station: "
+ "%pM on %d GHz band\n",
+ tx->sdata->name, hdr->addr1,
+ info->band ? 5 : 2);
+ }
return TX_DROP;
+ }
/*
* If we're associated with the sta at this point we know we can at
--
1.7.3.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 2/2] mac80211: Make un-found-rate splat a warn-once.
2013-03-19 21:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] mac80211: Make un-found-rate splat a warn-once greearb
@ 2013-03-22 10:28 ` Johannes Berg
2013-03-22 15:59 ` Ben Greear
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Berg @ 2013-03-22 10:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: greearb; +Cc: linux-wireless
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 14:19 -0700, greearb@candelatech.com wrote:
> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
>
> After that, print it out with net_ratelimit. We saw a system
> continually hit this warning, for reasons unknown, and it
> seems it bogged the system down enough to make it go OOM.
I'm not really sure I like this ... that points to a deeper problem, and
this just papers over it while causing more cost in the TX path for all
the different checks.
johannes
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] mac80211: Make un-found-rate splat a warn-once.
2013-03-22 10:28 ` Johannes Berg
@ 2013-03-22 15:59 ` Ben Greear
2013-04-03 12:41 ` Johannes Berg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ben Greear @ 2013-03-22 15:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Berg; +Cc: linux-wireless
On 03/22/2013 03:28 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 14:19 -0700, greearb@candelatech.com wrote:
>> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
>>
>> After that, print it out with net_ratelimit. We saw a system
>> continually hit this warning, for reasons unknown, and it
>> seems it bogged the system down enough to make it go OOM.
>
> I'm not really sure I like this ... that points to a deeper problem, and
> this just papers over it while causing more cost in the TX path for all
> the different checks.
If I add an 'unlikely' to the initial check, that gets back to the original
TX path cost, or are you worried about something else?
I think in most cases we should be using some variation of WARN_ONCE
in all the places that splat a warning...
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] mac80211: Make un-found-rate splat a warn-once.
2013-03-22 15:59 ` Ben Greear
@ 2013-04-03 12:41 ` Johannes Berg
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Berg @ 2013-04-03 12:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Greear; +Cc: linux-wireless
On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 08:59 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
> On 03/22/2013 03:28 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 14:19 -0700, greearb@candelatech.com wrote:
> >> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
> >>
> >> After that, print it out with net_ratelimit. We saw a system
> >> continually hit this warning, for reasons unknown, and it
> >> seems it bogged the system down enough to make it go OOM.
> >
> > I'm not really sure I like this ... that points to a deeper problem, and
> > this just papers over it while causing more cost in the TX path for all
> > the different checks.
>
> If I add an 'unlikely' to the initial check, that gets back to the original
> TX path cost, or are you worried about something else?
>
> I think in most cases we should be using some variation of WARN_ONCE
> in all the places that splat a warning...
Let's just make this WARN_ONCE() then maybe?
johannes
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] mac80211: Make beacon-loss-count configurable.
2013-03-19 21:19 [PATCH 1/2] mac80211: Make beacon-loss-count configurable greearb
2013-03-19 21:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] mac80211: Make un-found-rate splat a warn-once greearb
@ 2013-03-22 10:31 ` Johannes Berg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Berg @ 2013-03-22 10:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: greearb; +Cc: linux-wireless
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 14:19 -0700, greearb@candelatech.com wrote:
> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
>
> On loaded systems with lots of VIFs, I see lots of beacon
> timeouts, even though the connection to the AP is very
> good. Allow tuning the beacon-loss-count variable to
> give the system longer to process beacons if the user
> prefers.
Applied, I also added the number to the message, just in case somebody
sets it to 0 or 1 or something like that ... :-)
johannes
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-04-03 12:41 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-03-19 21:19 [PATCH 1/2] mac80211: Make beacon-loss-count configurable greearb
2013-03-19 21:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] mac80211: Make un-found-rate splat a warn-once greearb
2013-03-22 10:28 ` Johannes Berg
2013-03-22 15:59 ` Ben Greear
2013-04-03 12:41 ` Johannes Berg
2013-03-22 10:31 ` [PATCH 1/2] mac80211: Make beacon-loss-count configurable Johannes Berg
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.