btw 4019 doesnt support vht160 in ath10k see vht160_mcs_rx_highest in
core params
if it does support vht160, ath10k must be adjusted here
Am 28.04.2018 um 17:37 schrieb Ben Greear:
On 04/28/2018 08:26 AM, Sebastian Gottschall wrote:
Am 28.04.2018 um 17:01 schrieb Ben Greear:
On 04/27/2018 05:47 PM, s.gottsch...@dd-wrt.com wrote:
From: Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottsch...@dd-wrt.com>
current handling of peer_bw_rxnss_override parameter is based on
guessing the VHT160/8080 capability by rx rate. this is wrong and
may lead
to a non initialized peer_bw_rxnss_override parameter which is
required since VHT160 operation mode only supports 2x2 chainmasks
in addition the original code
initialized the parameter with wrong masked values.
This patch uses the peer phymode and peer nss information for
correct initialisation of the peer_bw_rxnss_override parameter.
if this peer information is not available, we initialize the
parameter by minimum nss which is suggested by QCA as temporary
workaround according
to the QCA sourcecodes.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottsch...@dd-wrt.com>
v2: remove debug messages
v3: apply some cosmetics, update documentation
v4: fix compile warning and truncate nss to maximum of 2x2 since
current chipsets only support 2x2 at vht160
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c | 44
++++++++++++++++++---------
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.c | 7 +----
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.h | 14 ++++++++-
3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
index 5be6386ede8f..de8a099c9f5a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
@@ -2528,23 +2528,37 @@ static void ath10k_peer_assoc_h_vht(struct
ath10k *ar,
__le16_to_cpu(vht_cap->vht_mcs.tx_highest);
arg->peer_vht_rates.tx_mcs_set = ath10k_peer_assoc_h_vht_limit(
__le16_to_cpu(vht_cap->vht_mcs.tx_mcs_map), vht_mcs_mask);
+ arg->peer_bw_rxnss_override = 0;
+
+ if (arg->peer_num_spatial_streams) {
Check for the 80+80 or 160 instead of num-spatial-streams, if if
something has
nss == 0, then act like it is 1 instead since it is obviously
configured incorrect.
this check is bellow. see the switch statement for the VHT160, 80_80
case.
if nss 0, it must fail here since we cannot handle nss = 0, in that
case just bit 31 is masked
+ int nss160 = arg->peer_num_spatial_streams;
I think this line should be:
int nss160 = arg->peer_num_spatial_streams / 2;
no. makes no sense. 2 would get 1 and 1 turns to zero. makes no sense
read the macro BW_NSS_FWCONF_160 first. it already does nss160-1
this would lead to -1 if spatial_streams is 1
Well, nss160 should be the number of streams we can use at 160 Mhz.
The macro
can convert to zero-based api that the firmware wants. A 9984 will
have nss == 4,
but you want nss160 to be 2. A 4019 will have nss == 2, but nss160
should be 1.
if (nss160 == 0) { nss160 = 1; } /* deal with
mis-configured nss */
no
if peer_num_spatial_stream is 0 (so nss160 too), the code is not
triggered. but another code. same as above
If NSS was 1, and you do 1/2, you get zero.
if (!arg->peer_num_spatial_streams && (arg->peer_phymode ==
MODE_11AC_VHT80_80 || arg->peer_phymode == MODE_11AC_VHT160)) {
arg->peer_bw_rxnss_override = BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_ENABLE;
}
If you have a 4019 client, it will have
arg->peer_num_spatial_streams == 2, but
it can only do 1x1 at 160Mhz.
peer_num_spatial_streams is calculated from mcs rate set. so why
should 4019 announce 2x2 if it just can to 1x1.
have you checked the mcs set at assoc management frame?
You are confused about nss vs the 160nss. They are different. I do
not know how to explain
this better. Dig through the firmware source and look at how they are
used. Basically, if
rate-ctrl decides 80Mhz is best, it can send at the normal 80Mhz NSS
(so, 4 for 9984, 2 for 4019),
but if rate-ctrl uses 160, it uses the different nss max (2 for 9984,
one for 4019).
+ /* truncate vht160 nss value to 2x2 since all known
chipsets do not support more than 2x2 in vht160 modes */
+ if (nss160 > 2)
+ nss160 = 2;
+ /* in case if peer is connected with vht160 or vht80+80,
we need to properly adjust rxnss parameters */
+ switch(arg->peer_phymode) {
+ case MODE_11AC_VHT80_80:
+ arg->peer_bw_rxnss_override =
BW_NSS_FWCONF_80_80(nss160);
+ /* fall through */
+ case MODE_11AC_VHT160:
+ arg->peer_bw_rxnss_override |= BW_NSS_FWCONF_160(nss160);
From looking at firmware, it will just ignore the bits it does not
need, so you do not need
to special case adding the 80_80 fields, you can do more like my
patch and just always add
those bits.
i'm following the reference code. in case 80_80 only is configure
vht160 nd 80_80 must be masked. for everything else vht160 only must
be masked.
thats the meaning. there are 2 override masks. independend for vht160
and 80_80. for sure i can do always both, but the reference code does
not
and who knows what else changed in the firmware. consider that the
crash bug first occured on 3.5.3. your CT codebase is older as far as
i know
I looked at both my code and the most recent QCA FW code. You can
leave the exra
complexity in the code if you wish, it at least does not break anything.
Thanks,
Ben
--
Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Regards
Sebastian Gottschall / CTO
NewMedia-NET GmbH - DD-WRT
Firmensitz: Stubenwaldallee 21a, 64625 Bensheim
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Darmstadt, HRB 25473
Geschäftsführer: Peter Steinhäuser, Christian Scheele
http://www.dd-wrt.com
email: s.gottsch...@dd-wrt.com
Tel.: +496251-582650 / Fax: +496251-5826565
