On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Yegor Yefremov <yegorslists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Yegor Yefremov > <yegorslists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Arik Nemtsov <arik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Yegor Yefremov >>> <yegorslists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Arik Nemtsov <arik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Both changes helped a lot. At least one can make a lot of tests >>>> without a crash, though I had one >>>> >>>> # calibrator wlan0 plt tune_channel 0 1 >>>> # calibrator wlan0 plt tx_tone 1 9000 >>>> [ 180.041505] wlcore: ERROR command complete timeout >>> >>> It's a FW error. >>> Not sure which change you tried, but if it was one of Luca's, I guess >>> the FW doesn't like it when you ignore its requests for a dummy >>> packet. Did you try my change with just disabling the re-arm? >> >> I have tried both changes. At first disabling the re-arm, it comes >> with the same crash as when I implement both changes at once. > > What to do with usual fw and scanning? > > # [ 165.608684] YY: wl1271_scan_complete_work > [ 165.614218] wlcore: Scan completed due to error. Ah you didn't mention you also had problems with a regular FW. It's probably either an API sync issue between the FW and driver, or a platform integration issue where you're sometimes not getting interrupts. Arik -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
