Rafał Miłecki wrote: > There are two firmware events we handle similarly in brcmfmac: > BRCMF_E_LINK and BRCMF_E_IF. The difference from firmware point of view > is that the first one means BSS remains present in the firmware. Trying > to (re)create it (e.g. when adding new virtual interface) will result in > an error. > > Current code treats both events in a similar way. It removes Linux > interface for each of them. It works OK with e.g. BCM43602. Its firmware > generates both events for each interface. It means we get BRCMF_E_LINK > and remove interface. That is soon followed by BRCMF_E_IF which means > BSS was also removed in a firmware. The only downside of this is a > harmless error like: > [ 208.643180] brcmfmac: brcmf_fweh_call_event_handler: no interface object > > Unfortunately BCM4366 firmware doesn't automatically remove BSS and so > it doesn't generate BRCMF_E_IF. In such case we incorrectly remove Linux > interface on BRCMF_E_LINK as BSS is still present in the firmware. It > results in an error when trying to re-create virtual interface, e.g.: > > iw phy phy1 interface add wlan1-1 type __ap > [ 3602.929199] brcmfmac: brcmf_ap_add_vif: timeout occurred > command failed: I/O error (-5) > > With this patch we don't remove Linux interface while firmware keeps > BSS. Thanks to this we keep a consistent states of host driver and > device firmware. > > Further improvement should be to mark BSS as disabled and remove > interface on BRCMF_E_LINK. Then we should add support for reusing > BSS-es. > > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx> Thanks, 1 patch applied to wireless-drivers-next.git: fd3667a8d1cb brcmfmac: don't remove interface on link down firmware event -- Sent by pwcli https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9140237/ -- 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
