Re: [RFT 0/3] ath9k: more PCU locking enhancements

["Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@atheros.com>]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 09:38:00AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
> On 10/27/2010 09:26 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com>  wrote:
> >> On 10/26/2010 03:17 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com>
> >>>   wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 10/26/2010 03:03 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com>
> >>>>>   wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 10/26/2010 01:40 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Here is some more PCU locking enhancements I tested today
> >>>>>>> while trying to resolve the WARN() that happens when we
> >>>>>>> try to stop RX DMA and fail. While working on that I figured
> >>>>>>> I'd work on the TX DMA stuff too, here's a shot at it. I
> >>>>>>> can no longer get TX / RX DMA rants, please test and let
> >>>>>>> me know if you do. I only tried some basic testing like
> >>>>>>> rmmoding while scannign, which typicallly produced some
> >>>>>>> errors. Now I don't get squat.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ben if you can test wit your super proprietary application
> >>>>>>> that'd be great.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This also simplifies locking considerably.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This doesn't break suspend so I'm happy. It also depends
> >>>>>>> on the last RX DMA fixes I had posted earlier. If you'd
> >>>>>>> like to get an all-in-one patch of all my patches pending
> >>>>>>> you can wget this file and git am it:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/mcgrof/patches/tmp/pending-mcgrof-2010-10-26-v1.patch
> >>>>>>> sha1sum: 874a3cc1a57f7e26ad191cd7b5045315f94c5823
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I have done some initial testing on the combined patch on top of
> >>>>>> today's
> >>>>>> wireless-testing tree.  I also have the memory-barrier patch applied to
> >>>>>> ath9k, as that is still not upstream.  I have no idea if it has any
> >>>>>> affect
> >>>>>> or not (I'm on x86..seems that wmb() stuff was mostly for other
> >>>>>> platforms?).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So far, it is showing zero problems, certainly no memory poison issues.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The wireless-testing tree has some lockdep warning related to a mouse
> >>>>>> driver
> >>>>>> that disables lockdep early, so it's possible there are lockdep issues
> >>>>>> waiting.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I will let this test run for a while, but it already looks more stable
> >>>>>> than before, so:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Tested-by:  Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Awesome! Thanks for testing. So how about the TX dma rants, do you
> >>>>> still get those?
> >>>>
> >>>> I've seen no rants at all.
> >>>
> >>> Fucking awesome!
> >>>
> >>>> I'm using my standard 130 STAs
> >>>
> >>> I love how now 130 STAs are "standard" for ath9k tests :)
> >>
> >> I dropped it down to 30 STAs so that all could associate and
> >> be stable with my AP.  I set up a tcp stream running as fast as it could
> >> between
> >> two virtual STAs.  It ran about 9Mbps bi-directional overnight
> >> with no obvious problems.
> >
> > Thanks for the reports, great to hear it is working fine now.
> 
> Of course, as soon as I hit send, something starts looking strange.
> 
> One of the interfaces generating ~9Mbps of traffic started bouncing,
> with warnings about a class 2 frame received.  Any idea what
> that means?
> 
> Not sure it's an ath9k issue though, as power-cycling the AP made
> everything start working again.  So, plz don't worry about this
> until we have a chance to test against different APs, etc.
> 
> 2010-10-27 08:28:06.066  sta11 (phy #0): connected to 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54
> 2010-10-27 08:28:06.075  sta14 (phy #0): scan started
> 2010-10-27 08:28:06.947  sta14 (phy #0): scan finished: 2412 2417 2422 2427 2432 2437 2442 2447 2452 2457 2462, ""
> 2010-10-27 08:28:06.994  sta26 (phy #0): deauth 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:19 reason 6: Class 2 frame received from non-authenticated station

Not sure what these are, but it seems like your AP decided to kick fist STA off.

> 2010-10-27 08:28:06.998  sta26 (phy #0): disconnected (by AP) reason: 6: Class 2 frame received from non-authenticated station
> 2010-10-27 08:28:07.038  sta14 (phy #0): auth 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:0d status: 0: Successful
> 2010-10-27 08:28:07.038  sta14: new station 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54
> 2010-10-27 08:28:07.038  sta14 (phy #0): assoc 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:0d status: 0: Successful
> 2010-10-27 08:28:07.038  sta14 (phy #0): connected to 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54
> 2010-10-27 08:28:07.093  sta17 (phy #0): scan started
> 2010-10-27 08:28:07.961  sta17 (phy #0): scan finished: 2412 2417 2422 2427 2432 2437 2442 2447 2452 2457 2462, ""
> 2010-10-27 08:28:08.018  sta17 (phy #0): auth 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:10 status: 0: Successful
> 2010-10-27 08:28:08.027  sta17: new station 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54
> 2010-10-27 08:28:08.037  sta17 (phy #0): assoc 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:10 status: 0: Successful
> 2010-10-27 08:28:08.038  sta17 (phy #0): connected to 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54
> 2010-10-27 08:28:08.074  sta26 (phy #0): scan started
> 2010-10-27 08:28:08.943  sta26 (phy #0): scan finished: 2412 2417 2422 2427 2432 2437 2442 2447 2452 2457 2462, ""
> 2010-10-27 08:28:08.983  sta7 (phy #0): deauth 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:06 reason 0: <unknown>

And not sure why but your AP decided to kiss your secondary STA goodbye.

> 2010-10-27 08:28:08.983  sta7 (phy #0): disconnected (by AP)
> 2010-10-27 08:28:09.014  sta26 (phy #0): auth 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:19 status: 0: Successful
> 2010-10-27 08:28:09.018  sta26: new station 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54
> 2010-10-27 08:28:09.028  sta26 (phy #0): assoc 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:19 status: 0: Successful
> 2010-10-27 08:28:09.028  sta26 (phy #0): connected to 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54
> 2010-10-27 08:28:09.053  sta8 (phy #0): scan started
> 2010-10-27 08:28:09.913  sta8 (phy #0): scan finished: 2412 2417 2422 2427 2432 2437 2442 2447 2452 2457 2462, ""
> 2010-10-27 08:28:09.957  sta23 (phy #0): deauth 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:16 reason 0: <unknown>

And another STA gets kicked off.

> 2010-10-27 08:28:09.958  sta23 (phy #0): disconnected (by AP)
> 2010-10-27 08:28:09.999  sta8 (phy #0): auth 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:07 status: 0: Successful
> 2010-10-27 08:28:10.003  sta8: new station 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54
> 2010-10-27 08:28:10.014  sta8 (phy #0): assoc 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54 -> 00:00:00:88:55:07 status: 0: Successful
> 2010-10-27 08:28:10.014  sta8 (phy #0): connected to 00:14:d1:c6:d2:54
> 2010-10-27 08:28:10.035  sta23 (phy #0): scan started

   Luis