(please don't top post) "Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan (Mohammed Shafi)" <moham...@qti.qualcomm.com> writes:
> my quick analysis suggests this belongs to > 'WMI_TLV_GRP_STATS' > > WMI_TLV_STATS_EXT_EVENTID = WMI_TLV_EV(WMI_TLV_GRP_STATS), equals to 90112 > (0x16000) > WMI_TLV_IFACE_LINK_STATS_EVENTID, 90113 > WMI_TLV_PEER_LINK_STATS_EVENTID, 90114 > WMI_TLV_RADIO_LINK_STATS_EVENTID, 90015 > .... ? > WMI_TLV_NLO_MATCH_EVENTID = WMI_TLV_EV(WMI_TLV_GRP_NLO_OFL), I checked and I think this is a some kind of RSSI stats event. I assume that's a new feature coming from RM.4.4 branch. (Michael said on IRC he is not seeing that with RM.2.0 branch.) > but this should be a harmless warning message indicating the host had not > implemented > any action for this particular event. > > For example in 10.2 wmi.c > > > case WMI_10_2_GPIO_INPUT_EVENTID: > case WMI_10_2_PEER_RATECODE_LIST_EVENTID: > case WMI_10_2_GENERIC_BUFFER_EVENTID: > case WMI_10_2_MCAST_BUF_RELEASE_EVENTID: > case WMI_10_2_MCAST_LIST_AGEOUT_EVENTID: > case WMI_10_2_WDS_PEER_EVENTID: > ath10k_dbg(ar, ATH10K_DBG_WMI, > "received event id %d not implemented\n", id); > break; Yes, it's harmless but ath10k should not print that warning to not distract the users. Can someone make a patch to silent the warning that similarly like with WMI_10_2_WDS_PEER_EVENTID above? -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k