From: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Jake Edge <jake@lwn.net>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Bisected 3.9 regression for iwl4965 connection problem to 1672c0e3
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 10:42:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130507084241.GA1581@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1367855046.8434.16.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 05:44:06PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 17:31 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
> > > But if so, I would also see
> > > the breakage on my setup, but I don't - it works quite well here.
> >
> > Are you testing on a passive channel? Try with a large beacon interval.
>
> I think most likely what happens is that it's on a passive channel, and
> the firmware drops the TX packet with a bad status. Before the patch,
> we'd just wait sitting on the channel for HZ/5 (200ms) before trying
> again, with the patch we immediately retransmit the packet, which will
> fail again and again until the firmware received a beacon.
>
> If you look at iwlwifi/dvm/, it has some passive_no_rx workaround for
> this, which I don't see in iwlegacy.
Can you explain why it is named passive_no_rx instead passive_no_tx ?
> I think the best way to solve this would be to do such a thing in
> iwlegacy as well, but until then and for stable maybe we should
> introduce another HW flag to restore the previous mac80211 behaviour?
I'm not sure if I like to add passive_no_rx to iwlegacy. Stopping queues
and waiting for beacon looks sticky, what happen if beacon will not be
received?
Perhaps I will just remove IEEE80211_HW_REPORTS_TX_ACK_STATUS from 4965,
it's simpler workaround ?
Stanislaw
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-07 8:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-05 20:38 Bisected 3.9 regression for iwl4965 connection problem to 1672c0e3 Jake Edge
2013-05-06 12:38 ` Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-05-06 14:37 ` Jake Edge
2013-05-06 15:30 ` Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-05-06 15:31 ` Johannes Berg
2013-05-06 15:44 ` Johannes Berg
2013-05-07 8:42 ` Stanislaw Gruszka [this message]
2013-05-07 8:46 ` Emmanuel Grumbach
2013-05-07 13:53 ` Johannes Berg
2013-05-07 15:35 ` Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-05-07 16:07 ` [PATCH 3.10] iwl4965: workaround connection regression on passive channel Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-05-22 11:59 ` Bisected 3.9 regression for iwl4965 connection problem to 1672c0e3 Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-05-24 20:28 ` Johannes Berg
2013-05-06 15:11 ` Johannes Berg
2013-05-06 15:21 ` Jake Edge
2013-05-06 15:24 ` Johannes Berg
2013-05-06 15:29 ` Jake Edge
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=20130507084241.GA1581@redhat.com \
--to=sgruszka@redhat.com \
--cc=jake@lwn.net \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).