From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from sabertooth01.qualcomm.com ([65.197.215.72]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1WMCEg-0007g7-0l for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 08:03:58 +0000 From: Kalle Valo Subject: Re: Firmware crash when sending large numbers of forwarded packets References: Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 10:03:31 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Avery Pennarun's message of "Fri, 7 Mar 2014 05:38:07 -0500") Message-ID: <87iorpnmlo.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Avery Pennarun Cc: ath10k Hi Avery, Avery Pennarun writes: > I'm having a problem where if I transmit too fast out the ath10k > interface in AP mode, I get a near-immediate firmware crash. [...] > Versions: > - kernel is based on current kvalo/for-linville branch (should I try > something else?) but seems to be the same in linux-next-20140114 so I > don't think this behaviour has changed lately. I do not recommend using for-linville branch for anything. As the name implies, it's only for John Linville to pull ath10k and ath6kl changes to his tree. What I recommend is to use the master branch of my ath.git tree. That's fairly recent wireless-testing (max 2 weeks old) plus latest ath10k + ath6kl patches I have (ie. merge of wireless-testing and my ath-next branch). But if you prefer to have clean history (which wireless-testing doesn't have), you can also use ath-next branch directly. That contains the patches which I'm planning to send Linville next. I wrote some documentation about branches here: http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Drivers/ath10k/sources#Git_branches But in a nutshell, use the master branch if you can. That way you are best aligned with the ath10k developers and also spot any regressions early on. > - firmware version 10.1.467.2-1, but also tested with 10.1.467.1-1 > with no difference. > > I assume other people are not experiencing this or they would have > mentioned it by now. What can I do to help debug this? We have reported the issue to the firmware team and got some feedback already. Hopefully we know more early next week. -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k