From: Rajkumar Manoharan <rmanohar@codeaurora.org>
To: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
Rajkumar Manoharan <rmanohar@qti.qualcomm.com>,
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: move mgmt descriptor limit handle under mgmt_tx
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2016 11:56:58 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6515868944c103e2b5bf0ed4e6f22924@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56DBADE6.5060507@candelatech.com>
On , Ben Greear wrote:
> On 03/05/2016 08:00 PM, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote:
>> On , Ben Greear wrote:
>>> On 03/05/2016 06:10 AM, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote:
>>>> Firmware reserves few descriptors for management frames
>>>> transmission.
>>>> In 16 MBSSID scenario, these slots will be easy exhausted due to
>>>> frequent
>>>> probe responses. So for 10.4 based solutions, probe responses are
>>>> limited
>>>> by a threshold (24).
>>>
>>> Do you mean probe requests or probe responses?
>>>
>> I meant probe responses in AP mode.
>>
>>> A single hardware scan request with lots of ssids in it will utilize
>>> all
>>> firmware tx management frames (which is 5, it seems). In my testing,
>>> the
>>> firmware would just never send probe requests for the rest of the
>>> ssids
>>> because the firmware scan state machine logic is broken.
>>>
>> Hmm... firmware expects both ssid and bssid list to be filled for
>> multiple probe
>> requests. Better to try with different probe spacing time, repeat
>> probe time and
>> probe delay and dwell time as these params change prob_req behavior in
>> firmware.
>
> It was easier to just fix the firmware than to hack the
> rest of the stack.
>
I didn't mean to hack the stack :) but scan params should not be
constant for all type
of scan requests.
>> Anyway this change is not related to scan functionality.
>>
>>> If you really do mean responses, then it sounds like it would be
>>> better to
>>> use the normal RX path for mgt frames in the firmware...
>>>
>> Let me clarify. Sending probe responses in AP mode are limited by a
>> threshold
>> for qca99x0 ("ath10k: drop probe responses when too many are queued").
>> This change
>> moves probe response checks under mgmt_tx from common data path.
>
> Ok, I'll take a look at that. I've implemented MGT frames over the
> completely
> normal HTT data-path transport, so probably I won't hit that in my
> systems
> anyway (there should be no internal mgt-frame limitation, except for
> locally
> created things like probe requests during scan). But, I could be
> missing
> something...I'm really just getting started with 10.4...
>
Great.. just noticed that this change needs to be rebased on top of
Michal's recent
data path series. Let me send next version.
-Rajkumar
_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rajkumar Manoharan <rmanohar@codeaurora.org>
To: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Cc: Rajkumar Manoharan <rmanohar@qti.qualcomm.com>,
ath10k@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: move mgmt descriptor limit handle under mgmt_tx
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2016 11:56:58 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6515868944c103e2b5bf0ed4e6f22924@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56DBADE6.5060507@candelatech.com>
On , Ben Greear wrote:
> On 03/05/2016 08:00 PM, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote:
>> On , Ben Greear wrote:
>>> On 03/05/2016 06:10 AM, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote:
>>>> Firmware reserves few descriptors for management frames
>>>> transmission.
>>>> In 16 MBSSID scenario, these slots will be easy exhausted due to
>>>> frequent
>>>> probe responses. So for 10.4 based solutions, probe responses are
>>>> limited
>>>> by a threshold (24).
>>>
>>> Do you mean probe requests or probe responses?
>>>
>> I meant probe responses in AP mode.
>>
>>> A single hardware scan request with lots of ssids in it will utilize
>>> all
>>> firmware tx management frames (which is 5, it seems). In my testing,
>>> the
>>> firmware would just never send probe requests for the rest of the
>>> ssids
>>> because the firmware scan state machine logic is broken.
>>>
>> Hmm... firmware expects both ssid and bssid list to be filled for
>> multiple probe
>> requests. Better to try with different probe spacing time, repeat
>> probe time and
>> probe delay and dwell time as these params change prob_req behavior in
>> firmware.
>
> It was easier to just fix the firmware than to hack the
> rest of the stack.
>
I didn't mean to hack the stack :) but scan params should not be
constant for all type
of scan requests.
>> Anyway this change is not related to scan functionality.
>>
>>> If you really do mean responses, then it sounds like it would be
>>> better to
>>> use the normal RX path for mgt frames in the firmware...
>>>
>> Let me clarify. Sending probe responses in AP mode are limited by a
>> threshold
>> for qca99x0 ("ath10k: drop probe responses when too many are queued").
>> This change
>> moves probe response checks under mgmt_tx from common data path.
>
> Ok, I'll take a look at that. I've implemented MGT frames over the
> completely
> normal HTT data-path transport, so probably I won't hit that in my
> systems
> anyway (there should be no internal mgt-frame limitation, except for
> locally
> created things like probe requests during scan). But, I could be
> missing
> something...I'm really just getting started with 10.4...
>
Great.. just noticed that this change needs to be rebased on top of
Michal's recent
data path series. Let me send next version.
-Rajkumar
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-06 6:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-05 14:10 [PATCH] ath10k: move mgmt descriptor limit handle under mgmt_tx Rajkumar Manoharan
2016-03-05 14:10 ` Rajkumar Manoharan
2016-03-05 14:30 ` Ben Greear
2016-03-05 14:30 ` Ben Greear
2016-03-06 4:00 ` Rajkumar Manoharan
2016-03-06 4:00 ` Rajkumar Manoharan
2016-03-06 4:11 ` Ben Greear
2016-03-06 4:11 ` Ben Greear
2016-03-06 6:26 ` Rajkumar Manoharan [this message]
2016-03-06 6:26 ` Rajkumar Manoharan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6515868944c103e2b5bf0ed4e6f22924@codeaurora.org \
--to=rmanohar@codeaurora.org \
--cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=greearb@candelatech.com \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmanohar@qti.qualcomm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.