Astrit Zhushi | 24 Oct 18:12 2014
Picon
Picon

ath9k_hw_addrxbuf_edma

Hi,

I was wondering if someone can help me understand receiver buffer
management on the ath9k driver.

While running TCP experiments using an AP and a wireless node (both
running  AR9380 mini PCI-e cards, with PCI-e adapter) I noticed that
TCP was invoking fast retransmit. At the transmitter, the retry
counters didn't show that the frame was dropped. In addition, looking
at the over the air captured traces (by a third party wireless node),
the receiver's card actually acknowledges the missing frame and the
traces show only one transmission of the missing frame.
Instrumenting the driver I noticed that the missing frames are being
dropped because the received frame descriptor ID didn't match that of
the Athero's vendor ID.
That is, AR_DescId=0 and MS(rxsp->ds_info, AR_DescId) != 0x168c (maybe
replace it with ATHEROS_VENDOR_ID?) condition on ar9003_mac.c fails.

So I started looking at the way the receive buffers are managed by the
ath9k driver. This is my understanding so far:

Before the the card can use the DMA allocated buffers (the pool of 512
buffers kept in rx.rxbuf, they are added to ATH9K_RX_QUEUE_LP (128
buffers) or ATH9K_RX_QUEUE_HP (16 buffers) FIFO queues) and then the
hardware is told about the address by calling ath9k_hw_addrxbuf_edma
function. After which point the hardware can make use of those
buffers.

On a receive interrupt, the driver processes incoming buffers, calls
ath_edma_get_buffers, removes the buffer from rx_edma->rx_fifo
(Continue reading)

Ali Abedi | 24 Oct 18:04 2014
Picon
Picon

strange MPDU loss pattern

Hello,

We study the effects of 802.11n frame aggregation on throughput. We 
noticed a
strange pattern in the MPDU loss within an aggregated frame. It seems 
that the
second half of the MPDUs (those with higher sequence numbers) in an 
aggregated frame
are more likely to be lost. Is this a known fact or is there any 
explanation for it?

For example if 32 frames are aggregated with sequence numbers 100 to 131.
Frames with sequence numbers 100-115 are more likely to be received 
correctly
than 116-131.

Best,
Ali
Adrien Decostre | 24 Oct 16:58 2014
Picon

Questions regarding ath9k and new EN 300 328 regulation

Dear all,

 

I am looking for information about the compliancy of the ath9k driver to the EN 300 328 ETSI regulation.

Would someone know if ath9k has already been tested for this regulation?

Is it needed to enable any specific flag in ath9k to guarantee compliancy to the adaptivity tests described in EN 300 328?

 

I already tried by applying the patches “ath9k: Fix regulatory compliance” (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-wireless/msg115798.html)  and “ath9k: Fix ETSI compliance for AR9462 2.0” (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-wireless/msg118665.html) but this does not seem to be sufficient.

 

Many thanks in advance for any help

 

Best regards

 

Adrien

_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel <at> lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
Kamran Nishat | 23 Oct 16:32 2014
Picon

Re: Block ACK without frame aggregation

It is a part of 802.11n because of compatibility with 802.11e. But because 802.11n gives a much more advanced AMPDU based thing I think no one implemented it.  It not a mandatory  part of WMM I suppose. 

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Kamran Nishat <kamran.nishat <at> gmail.com> wrote:
I was talking about the same one. it was introduced in 802.11e (Tx-OP) not in 802.11n

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Ali Abedi <a2abedi <at> uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
Dear Adrian and Kamran,

Thanks for your replies. I think we are not referring to the same concept.
Can you please have a look at the attache diagram. I need the middle one
the immediate BA not delayed BA.


Thanks,
Ali




On 14-10-22 11:18 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
I don't think mac80211 supports delayed-BA. :(


-adrian


On 22 October 2014 08:38, Ali Abedi <a2abedi <at> uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
Hello,

I am interested to know if we can send multiple packets (non-aggregated,
single packets) and then ask
for a block ACK? I like to know if this functionality has been
implemented in ath9k or if
it is possible to achieve this with slight code modifications.

What I need:
Frame-SIFS-Frame-SIFS-Frame-SIFS-REQ Block ACK-SIFS-Block ACK

Best,
Ali
_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel <at> lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel



_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel <at> lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
Li, Hongchun | 23 Oct 06:54 2014

Re: FRDC material for meeting in 10.23

Hi, Oleksij,

 

I mistakely send an email to the maillist.

I don’t know who the administrator of the maillist.

Can you help me to delete the email?

Thank you.

 

Best Regards,

Li Hongchun

 

From: Li, Hongchun/ 红春
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 12:45 PM
To: (ath9k-devel <at> lists.ath9k.org)
Subject: FRDC material for meeting in 10.23

 

Hello, Yamashita-san,

 

The attached files are FRDC’s material for meeting today.

Please check and refer.

 

 

Best Regards,

Li Hongchun

 

------------------------------------------------

Li Hongchun

FUJITSU R&D CENTER CO.,LTD.

15/F,Tower A, Ocean international Center,No.56

Dong Si Huan Zhong Rd,Chaoyang District,Beijing P.R.China 100025

TEL(010)59691000 Ext.5654 FAX:(010)59691504

E-mail:  lihongchun <at> cn.fujitsu.com

----------------------------------------------------

 

_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel <at> lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
Ali Abedi | 22 Oct 17:38 2014
Picon
Picon

Block ACK without frame aggregation

Hello,

I am interested to know if we can send multiple packets (non-aggregated, 
single packets) and then ask
for a block ACK? I like to know if this functionality has been 
implemented in ath9k or if
it is possible to achieve this with slight code modifications.

What I need:
Frame-SIFS-Frame-SIFS-Frame-SIFS-REQ Block ACK-SIFS-Block ACK

Best,
Ali
이재훈 | 22 Oct 09:09 2014

Questions about ath9k driver

Hi, my name is jaehoon Lee and a graduate student at Seoul National University.

 

Recently, I bought the alix 2d2 device and wireless card(wlm200nx) for experiment the IEEE 802.11aa.

 

How can I install the ath9k driver and open FirmWare for WiFi networks in linux such as Ubuntu?

 

Thanks for reading my questions.

 

Best regards

 

 

Jaehoon Lee

_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel <at> lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
Li, Hongchun | 18 Oct 09:46 2014

IBSS network crashes after one device leaves network

I’m building an IBSS network using TP-Link TL-WN722N USB WiFi dongle.

I find that it is drived by ath9k.

 

Here is a problem I encountered.

First, I build an IBSS network with more than 8 devices.

For example, a network consists of 9 devices, N1, N2, …, N9.

All devices have same WiFi module.

 

When N9 joined network, kernel throws a warning, “Unable to move IBSS STA MAC_ADDR to state 3 (-105)”.

However, the network works correctly. Any node can communicate with each other.

 

But if I turn off one device, for example N3, the network crashes after a few minutes.

Ping command fails between any two devices in network.

Get no warning/error message from kernel.

After N3 is turned off and network crashes, I turned on N3 and network works correctly again.

 

I find the number 8 is an macro in device driver code: drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc.h

252 #define ATH9K_HTC_MAX_STA 8

It seems like that when there are more than 8 devices in network, driver returns an error ENOBUFS(-105).

 

But in linux kernel source: net/mac80211/sta_info.c, I found this,

436  if (sdata->vif.type == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) {

437        sdata_info(sdata,

438                 "failed to move IBSS STA %pM to state %d (%d) - keeping it anyway\n",

439                 sta->sta.addr, state + 1, err);

440       err = 0;

441  }

So when it is an ad hoc network, kernel just ignore errors from driver.

This answers why ibss network work correctly when there are more than 8 devices.

 

But I cannot figure out why the network crashes after one device is turned off.

Does anyone have any idea how to solve this problem?

 

Li Chun

 

_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel <at> lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
JAGADEESH Y C | 16 Oct 09:53 2014
Picon

how to disable 11d in Atheros -8462

Hi ,

I am doing P2P testing with Third party Atheros card ,
Atheros card comes as Auto go when passive scanning flag is cleared i,e when it sees any 5G beacon

iw list output :

Frequencies:
                        * 5180 MHz [36] (15.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS)
                        * 5200 MHz [40] (15.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS)
                        * 5220 MHz [44] (15.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS)
                        * 5240 MHz [48] (15.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS)
                        * 5260 MHz [52] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5280 MHz [56] (15.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5300 MHz [60] (15.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5320 MHz [64] (15.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5500 MHz [100] (16.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5520 MHz [104] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5540 MHz [108] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5560 MHz [112] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5580 MHz [116] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5600 MHz [120] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5620 MHz [124] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5640 MHz [128] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5660 MHz [132] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5680 MHz [136] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5700 MHz [140] (16.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS, radar detection)
                        * 5745 MHz [149] (17.0 dBm)
                        * 5765 MHz [153] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS)
                        * 5785 MHz [157] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS)
                        * 5805 MHz [161] (17.0 dBm)
                        * 5825 MHz [165] (17.0 dBm) (passive scanning, no IBSS)

So how do i  disable 11d so that passive scanning for all frequencies gets cleared ..?

Thanks,
Jagadeesh

_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel <at> lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
Georgios Kyriakou | 15 Oct 23:00 2014
Picon

MAC Layer Retransmissions during the same TXOP

Hey all,

I don't know if this is the best place to ask, thus I apologize in advance.

Back in the day I was messing around with MadWifi and, if I remember properly, after a packet was transmitted if the sender did not receive an ACK in SIFS time after the completion of the transmission, the sender would attempt a retransmission using the same or lower rate (multi rate retransmissions) without going into the backoff/contention phase. 

I spent some time going through the 802.11-2012 protocol trying to find relevant information without any luck. Is anyone familiar with that concept? Is it implemented that way in ath9k? Is this what the protocol implies?

Any pointers/suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Thank you,
George
_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel <at> lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
Matt Foster | 12 Oct 18:02 2014

ath9k_htc - 2 VIFs: concurrent AP and STATION mode

Hi,

I may be trying something unsupported here, but thought I would ask the question anyway.

With ath9k_htc it seems easy enough to create two virtual interfaces, one in AP mode, and one in Station mode.

Using hostapd 2.3 to get rid of the requirement for a monitor interface (it seems only two VIFs are
possible), then I can create a VIF to run hostapd on happily.
I can also create a 2nd VIF, and I can ifconfig it up with an address.
However I can't use wpa_supplicant with it:
adhoc0: State: SCANNING -> AUTHENTICATING
EAPOL: External notification - EAP success=0
EAPOL: Supplicant port status: Unauthorized
EAPOL: External notification - EAP fail=0
EAPOL: Supplicant port status: Unauthorized
EAPOL: External notification - portControl=Auto
EAPOL: Supplicant port status: Unauthorized
nl80211: Authenticate (ifindex=7)
  * bssid=00:33:bb:f8:e5:ba
  * freq=2437
  * SSID - hexdump_ascii(len=7):
     XX XX XX XX XX XX XX                              XXXXX
  * IEs - hexdump(len=0): [NULL]
  * Auth Type 0
nl80211: MLME command failed: ret=-16 (Device or resource busy)
adhoc0: SME: Authentication request to the driver failed
Added BSSID XXXXXXX into blacklist

Similarly if hostapd is not running, and wpa_supplicant is started (which will now work), hostapd will not
start on it's VIF.

I'm running on 3.12.29 (on arm) with the current version of the firmware from https://github.com/qca/open-ath9k-htc-firmware

Am I missing a trick here, or is this something that simply doesn't work with ath9k_htc?

Thanks,

Matt

Gmane