Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCHv3] wifi: Introduce 802.11ac support

From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@adurom.com>,
	Sven Eckelmann <sven@open-mesh.com>,
	ath10k@lists.infradead.org, Matti Laakso <malaakso@elisanet.fi>,
	Simon Wunderlich <simon@open-mesh.com>,
	OpenWrt Development List <openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org>
Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCHv3] wifi: Introduce 802.11ac support
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:00:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5304F130.5040406@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87fvnfzbg0.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com>

On 02/19/2014 01:41 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> (Adding ath10k@lists.infradead.org)
> 
> Sven Eckelmann <sven@open-mesh.com> writes:
> 
>> On Monday 17 February 2014 05:57:25 Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> Sven Eckelmann <sven@open-mesh.com> writes:
>>>> The ath10k patch wasn't resent because the driver patches are now
>>>> integrated in the OpenWrt mac80211 package. The answer in
>>>>
>>>>  http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.embedded.openwrt.devel/22422 also
>>>>  wasn't> 
>>>> quite promising.
>>>
>>> What do you mean? What was wrong with my answer?
>>
>> Nothing is "wrong" but you said that there are two branches. One is "AP mode, 
>> nothing else" and the other one is "main branch again has more
>> features, like P2P, ...". So I don't see a good reason why a multi-purpose 
>> system like openwrt should accept my patch to change it to the "AP-only" 
>> ath10k firmware.
> 
> AP mode in 10.1 firmware is extensively tested and that's why I strongly
> recommend to use 10.1 firmware as the default in openwrt. I don't think
> it's wise to knowingle cripple ath10k AP mode in openwrt just because
> lack of P2P support. Like Matti also said, AP mode is most important in
> openwrt, we should have that properly supported first.
> 
> But we should try ways to mitigate the problem of having two firmware
> branches. For example, should we have a module parameter in ath10k to
> choose which firmware to use? Or is there even a way to do that
> automatically based on what interfaces are used?
> 
> I'm happy to hear any ideas how to improve this.

I don't think it can be done automatically, at least not in general,
because users may add/remove interface types after the firmware is
loaded.  Resetting the NIC and reloading firmware is a bit touchy
currently, so I don't think you want to switch to different
firmware dynamically.

A module option is probably the best way to do this in my opinion.

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