Re: [PATCH] ath10k: fix rssi reporting.

[Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>]

On 05/16/2014 06:16 AM, Janusz Dziedzic wrote:
> On 16 May 2014 15:04, Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 05/16/2014 05:18 AM, Janusz Dziedzic wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15 May 2014 20:34,  <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
>>>>
>>>> When the driver cannot provide proper rssi, mark
>>>> status with RX_FLAG_NO_SIGNAL_VAL so that stack
>>>> properly ignores it.
>>>>
>>> I think we should skip this one while we know rssi/rates.
>>> They are correct for all packets between START_VALID and END_VALID flags.
>>
>>
>> Skip what, the patch?  With current code, you are sending packets up
>> the tree without signal being set and yet without the flag set that says
>> to ignore the (unset) signal value.
>>
> Didn't reproduce this yet, while we have this values saved when
> START_VALID - rx status is an template in htt structure.
>
> struct ieee80211_rx_status *rx_status = &htt->rx_status;
>
> Are you sure you have all patches?
> This could be passible if we will get first packet with only flag
> END_VALID (not sure this is even possible). In case we get packets
> with START valid before, we will use template correctly. In case we
> will get packets with flags START and END valid we will also reports
> this correctly.
> Did you reproduce this with official firmware?
>
> BTW
> your patch break rates info based also on htt->rx_status template.
>
> BR
> Janusz

I will test again without my patch, and if you think current code is
correct, then just drop this patch and I'll retest everything when I
move back to testing on kalle's tree.

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k