Hi Devaraj!

Thanks a lot for the hint. It works like a charm! Now I'm able to load all 5 
drivers using insmod. Thanks again man!!!

One short question regarding iw tool. If I understand you right, I have to add 
the iw tool (source) to the kernel source and build it once again?! Can you 
give me a hint where I must put the iw tool source?

Many thanks and best regards,
Marco

>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
>Gesendet: Montag, 13. Oktober 2014 18:43
>An: Steger, Marco
>Cc: [email protected]
>Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: 802.11s as link layer in libre-mesh
>
>Hi Marco,
>
>Yeah, it's a well known problem:
>
>Please comment the 2 lines inside your compat driver files:
>
>> clk_disable
>> clk_enable
>
>because clk_disable & clk_enable are already present in Linux kernel 3.4.which
>you have build for Nexus4.
>
>But, you have (clk_disable & clk_enable) inside wcn36xx device driver files so 
>by
>commenting the same in the device driver files will solve the problem.
>
>> You don't have to make any other changes except iw tool iw tool needs
>> to be build along with Linux kernel 3.4 not w.r.t Android.
>
>Hopefully this one helps you to take your projects further.
>
>
>Best regards,
>Devaraj J
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>> Hi Devaraj,
>>
>> again thanks for your quick answers. Without your help I would be lost!
>>
>> I booted my Nexus 4 with compiled zImage /  boot.img. I've checked the
>phone info:
>>
>> Kernel version:
>> 3.4.0-perf
>> root@insc00471 #1
>> Fri Oct 10 (The date I built the kernel)
>>
>> This looks ok or?
>>
>> Then I tried to load the modules using insmod:
>> root@mako:/sdcard/mesh_driver # insmod compat.ko
>> insmod: init_module 'compat.ko' failed (Exec format error)
>> root@mako:/sdcard/mesh_driver # dmesg <3>[  247.556966] compat:
>> exports duplicate symbol clk_disable (owned by
>kernel)
>>
>> (The same problem when I insmod the wcn36xx_msm.ko before...) do you
>have
>> any ideas?
>>
>>
>> You also mentioned the iw tool. I will have to download and build it
>> for
>Android. (I don't think it is installed by default.)
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your help and time!!! It would be great if you have
>> any
>idea what would be wrong here...
>>
>>  Kind regards,
>> Marco
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>Von: [email protected]
>>>[mailto:[email protected]]
>Gesendet: Montag, 13. Oktober 2014 12:14
>>>An: Steger, Marco
>>>Cc: [email protected]
>>>Betreff: Re: AW: AW: 802.11s as link layer in libre-mesh Hi Marco, You
>>>are suppose to execute combat.ko before wcn36xx_msm.ko, MESH support
>>>needs to be tested from executing "#iw list" command which  lists
>>>"Supported interface modes: *mesh point" along with other modes.
>>>Create
>a MESH POINT :-
>>>Create at-least two mesh points to establish communication.
>>>General steps for creating MESH NODES to establish "Peer to Peer"
>Communication between two wireless entities :-
>>>1.      On any Linux machine please, enter in Super User (#SU) mode.
>2.     #killall wpa_supplicant
>>>3.   #iw dev <wlanX> set type mp
>>>4.   #iw dev <wlanX> set meshid <XXXXXX>
>>>5.   #iw dev <wlanX> set channel <Number>
>>>6.   #ifconfig <wlanX> xx.xx.xx.xx up
>>>Once after executing the above steps, 2 entities must communicate with
>>>each other & the same can be verified by executing # ping xx.xx.xx.xx
>>>[from both the entities] Best regards, Devaraj J
>>>> Hi Devaraj!
>>>> I had some trouble getting my 64bit Linux machine running.
>>>> That’s
>>>> why it takes some time to start with your guide to get Mesh working
>>>> on
>my Nexus4.
>>>> First of all thanks for that great guide. Everything worked fine and
>now I have the 5 .ko files on my Nexus and I was also able to run the new 
>kernel
>on my device.
>>>> Then I tried to load the files using insmod. "insmod wcn36xx_msm.ko"
>seems to work fine but for the other files I got " insmod: init_module
>'wcn36xx.ko' failed (No such file or directory)" or " insmod: can't open
>'combat.co' " errors. Do you have an idea what could wrong here?
>Can you also give me a hint what to do next when the insmod finally works?
>>>> How to connect to the mesh network?
>>>> I hope you can help me once again!!!
>>>> Thanks in advance and kind regards,
>>>> Marco
>>>>>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>>>Von: Devaraj J [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 01. Oktober 2014 14:16
>>>>>An: Steger, Marco; [email protected]
>>>>>Betreff: Re: AW: 802.11s as link layer in libre-mesh Hi All, I was
>>>>>able to successfully get the MESH up & running on Nexus 4. In
>Our project we used Linux kernel 3.4.0 But, MESH comes in wcn36xx driver (Linux
>kernel : 3.16) So we need to back port from 3.16 to
>3.4.0 Linux  Kernel.
>>>>>Below are the steps followed to get MESH up on Nexus4.
>>>>>Download the backport WCN36XX Wireless device driver from URL:-
>http://drvbp1.linux-foundation.org/~mcgrof/rel-html/backports/ select:
> backports-3.16-1
>>>>># mv /home/<user>Download/backport-3.16-1.tar.xz  ./ # tar -xf
>>>>> ./backport-
>>>>>3.16-1.tar.xz # cd backport-3.16-1 # make defconfig-wcn36xx # make
>menuconfig
>>>>>       [*] Enable mac80211 mesh networking (pre-802.11s) support.
>>>>>    save & exit
>>>>># make KLIB=<kenrel directory path where  zImage  compiled>
>>>>>KLIB_BUILD=<kerenl directory path where zImage  compiled> This will
>create compat.ko , cfg80211.ko , mac80211.ko and wcn36xx.ko.
>>>>># cd ..
>>>>>Download the wcn36xx_msm driver source  code from URL:
>>>>>https://github.com/KrasnikovEugene/wcn36xx
>>>>>click on Download ZIP (right side corner).
>>>>># mv wcn36xx-master.zip  ./
>>>>># unzip  wcn36xx-master.zip
>>>>># cd wcn36xx-master/wcn36xx_msm
>>>>># make KLIB=<kernel directory path where  zImage  compiled >
>>>>>KLIB_BUILD=<kernel--directory path where  zImage  compiled > This
>>>>>will
>create wcn36xx_msm.ko  in current directory.
>>>>>#cd ..
>>>>>Hope this works for you.
>>>>>Br,
>>>>>Devaraj J
>>>>>On Wednesday 01 October 2014 11:19 AM, Steger, Marco via Devel wrote:
>>>>>   Dear all,
>>>>>   first of all thank you for your input.
>>>>>   Tomorrow I'm back in my office and I will start to set up the
>>>>>802.11s stuff for my nexus 4 according to the steps stated by Bob
>>>>>and the
>information  about wcn36xx (thanks to Yeoh Chun-Yeow)
>>>>>   I will (try to) document all necessary steps to enable mesh on my
>>>>>Android Smartphone. I will post the documentation here when I'm
>finished with it  and than we can discuss, if there is a good place to put it 
>to help
>others  with the same issue.
>>>>>   Thanks again for your help and I hope that I can count on you if
>>>>>there  are further questions,
>>>>>   Marco
>>>>>           -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>>>           Von: Devel [mailto:[email protected]] Im
>>>Auftrag
>>>>>von Ross
>>>>>           Wakelin via Devel
>>>>>           Gesendet: Mittwoch, 01. Oktober 2014 00:47
>>>>>           An: Javier Cardona
>>>>>           Cc: [email protected]
>>>>>           Betreff: Re: 802.11s as link layer in libre-mesh
>>>>>           Hi Javier
>>>>>           I can't comment for what is in or out of the standards.
>>>>>           Our biggest deployed mesh had 10 nodes, of which 4 were
>>>repeater
>>>>>only nodes.
>>>>>           Our kit consists of repeaters and endpoint nodes. Endpoint nodes
>>>>>have the
>>>>>           openwrt device connected to either a network video recorder
>>>and 4
>>>>>cameras, or
>>>>>           a digital signage device, or a voip node with two sip extension
>>>>>phones.  All the
>>>>>           nodes, including the repeater nodes, publish an SSID for staff
>>>>>access to all the
>>>>>           other devices, and internet access through a gateway node.
>>>>>           The way we have it, the nodes all have two IP addresses, one for
>>>the
>>>>>"internal"
>>>>>           mesh network so the devices can find and talk to each other and
>>>>>exchange
>>>>>           routing information, and a "behind"
>>>>>           network that contains all the supported devices.  We use OLSR to
>>>>>publish and
>>>>>           share the behind networks over the mesh.  The mesh runs on
>>>5Ghz, and
>>>>>the
>>>>>           access network is 2.4Ghz.
>>>>>           All our devices are portable, and we can have the mesh up and
>>>>>running in less
>>>>>           than 10 minutes.
>>>>>           The biggest challenge is finding the best locations for the
>>>repeater
>>>>>nodes, and we
>>>>>           have a process that runs on the openwrt device that checks the
>>>OLSR
>>>>>"goodness"
>>>>>           for each link, and then shows that as a colour/brightness/blink
>>>rate
>>>>>report on an
>>>>>           RGB LED, so we can walk around with the repeater node turned
>>>on,
>>>>>looking for
>>>>>           the location that gives the best coverage AND connection back
>>>to the
>>>>>mesh.
>>>>>           Our repeaters have 20dBm omni aerials connected (three per
>>>node for
>>>>>N) and we
>>>>>           can normally get about 70-150Mbs link rate.
>>>>>           Hope this helps.
>>>>>           Ross
>>>>>           On 1 October 2014 11:24, Javier Cardona <[email protected]>
>>>>><mailto:[email protected]>  wrote:
>>>>>                   Hi Ross,
>>>>>                   Thanks for the info.  May I ask how big a network can
>>>you support
>>>>>with
>>>>>           OLSR over 11s?
>>>>>                   Early drafts of the 11s amendment supported OLSR in
>>>addition to
>>>>>HWMP.
>>>>>           But support for OLSR was dropped because "there are no
>>>additional
>>>>>deployment
>>>>>           scenarios or usage models that RA-OLSR enables beyond those
>>>that are
>>>>>enabled
>>>>>           by HWMP"  [Source: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/07/11-
>>>>>07-2547-02-
>>>>>           000s-reconsidering-ra-olsr.ppt ]
>>>>>                   I'm curious if that was an accurate statement or the
>>>proponents of
>>>>>that
>>>>>           motion were just in a hurry to get the standard ratified... :)
>>>>>                   Cheers,
>>>>>                   Javier
>>>>>                   On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Ross Wakelin
>>>>>           <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>                           Hiya
>>>>>                           In our mesh platform that is used to support
>>>emergency
>>>>>           responders, we use an underlying
>>>>>                           11s layer, leveraging the
>>>>>authentication/encryption capabilities,
>>>>>           and then use OLSR on top
>>>>>                           to provide the routing and reporting/managing
>>>we need.
>>>>>                           Sitting on top of 11n and Openwrt, it just 
>>>>> works,
>>>and its stable.
>>>>>           We use it to carry voice, video
>>>>>                           and data across sites.
>>>>>                           On 1 October 2014 05:42, Pau via Devel
>>>>>           <[email protected]>
>>>>><mailto:[email protected]>  wrote:
>>>>>                                   Find my comments in line.
>>>>>                                   On 30/09/14 17:56, Javier Cardona
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>                                   > Hi Pau,
>>>>>                                   >
>>>>>                                   > I agree with your assessment:  11s
>>>brings a number of
>>>>>           benefits over ad-hoc.
>>>>>                                   >    In addition to the ones you 
>>>>> listed, I
>>>>>would add:
>>>>>                                   >
>>>>>                                   > 6. symmetric security (SAE)
>>>>>                                   In AdHoc it is possible to use WPA2 PSK,
>>>however the
>>>>>           implementation of
>>>>>                                   SAE in 11s is probably better because of
>>>a cleaner
>>>>>           integration.
>>>>>                                   > 7. customizable path selection
>mechanism (which you
>>>>>           could use with your
>>>>>                                   > custom routing)
>>>>>                                   I suppose you mean the possibility of
>>>using a different
>>>>>           routing protocol
>>>>>                                   instead of HWMP such as OLSR (I've seen
>>>there is already
>>>>>           some
>>>>>                                   implementation on this). However in our
>>>case we are not
>>>>>           trying to
>>>>>                                   integrate 11s with bat-adv/bmx6 but just
>>>use 11s as layer
>>>>>           1-2 and
>>>>>                                   bat-adv/bmx6 as layer 2.5/3.
>>>>>                                   > 8. power save
>>>>>                                   Yes, that is great, I've seen another 
>>>>> post
>>>talking about
>>>>>           802.11s in
>>>>>                                   Android, that could bring us many
>>>possibilities too :)
>>>>>                                   > 9. interoperability:  there are some
>>>incompatible ad-
>>>>>           hoc implementations
>>>>>                                   > out there as WFA did not test above 11
>>>Mbps.
>>>>>           open80211s made vendor
>>>>>                                   > neutrality and interoperability a 
>>>>> priority
>>>since day one.
>>>>>                                   Right, we've experienced such
>>>>>incompatibilities and this
>>>>>           is actually one
>>>>>                                   of the points we are sick of Ad-Hoc.
>>>>>                                   > The only point that is debatable is 2:
>>>>>there aren't that
>>>>>           many cards/drivers
>>>>>                                   > that support it.
>>>>>                                   We try to stick at Atheros drivers so 
>>>>> here
>>>11s seems to
>>>>>           have even better
>>>>>                                   support than Ad-Hoc.
>>>>>                                   > Best of luck,
>>>>>                                   >
>>>>>                                   Thank you for your comments Javier.
>>>>>                                   > Javier
>>>>>                                   >
>>>>>                                   > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Pau
>>>via Devel
>>>>>           <[email protected]>
>>>>><mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>                                   > wrote:
>>>>>                                   >
>>>>>                                   >> Hello.
>>>>>                                   >> I'm one of the developers of the 
>>>>> libre-
>>>mesh project
>>>>>           [1]. Our aim is to
>>>>>                                   >> develop an OpenWRT based solution
>>>for quick and
>>>>>           easy building free/libre
>>>>>                                   >> mesh networks.
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>                                   >> Our network architecture is quite
>>>different from the
>>>>>           common ones, we are
>>>>>                                   >> mixing two routing protocols in 
>>>>> layer2
>>>and layer3
>>>>>           (batman-adv and bmx6).
>>>>>                                   >> You can find more information about
>>>it here [2].
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>                                   >> Until now we were using Ad-Hoc as
>>>link layer,
>>>>>           however recently we have
>>>>>                                   >> started to consider the idea of using
>>>11s instead. We
>>>>>           are not interested
>>>>>                                   >> in the routing layer (HWMP) because
>>>we need some
>>>>>           features provided by
>>>>>                                   >> batman-adv, so we disable it by
>>>setting the option
>>>>>           mesh_forwarding to
>>>>>                                   >> false.
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>                                   >> I've already performed some tests
>>>and the results look
>>>>>           quite good. Using
>>>>>                                   >> 11s instead of ad-hoc bring us some
>>>advantages which
>>>>>           are:
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>                                   >> 1. Better support for 11n
>>>>>                                   >> 2. Better compatibility with drivers
>>>>>                                   >> 3. You can bridge an 11s interface to
>>>another
>>>>>           interface if necessary
>>>>>                                   >> 4. It does NOT try to synchronize the
>>>TSF counter of
>>>>>           your wifi card
>>>>>                                   >> 5. You can create up to 8 11s VAP
>>>mixed with adhoc,
>>>>>           AP, client, etc...
>>>>>                                   >> 5. Get benefit of a newer protocol
>>>design
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>                                   >> I would like to know your opinion on
>>>this topic. None
>>>>>           of us now deeply
>>>>>                                   >> how 11s works, so we don't really
>>>know if what we
>>>>>           are trying to do is a
>>>>>                                   >> madness or a good idea. It would be
>>>also very
>>>>>           interesting for us to know
>>>>>                                   >> which options can we tun for getting
>>>better profit of
>>>>>           using 11s as link
>>>>>                                   >> layer.
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>                                   >> Thank you for your efforts on
>developing 11s.
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>                                   >> Cheers.
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>                                   >> [1] https://dev.libre-
>>>>>mesh.org/projects/libre-mesh
>>>>>                                   >> [2]
>>>>>                                   >> https://dev.libre-
>>>>>mesh.org/projects/libre-
>>>>>           mesh/wiki/NetworkArchitecture
>>>>>                                   >> --
>>>>>                                   >> ./p4u
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>                                   >>
>>>>>           _______________________________________________
>>>>>                                   >> Devel mailing list
>>>>>                                   >> [email protected]
>>>>>                                   >> http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-
>>>>>           bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>>>                                   >
>>>>>                                   --
>>>>>                                   ./p4u
>>>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>>>                                   Devel mailing list
>>>>>                                   [email protected]
>>>>>                                   http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-
>>>>>           bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>>>   Devel mailing list
>>>>>   [email protected]
>>>>>   http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to