On Tuesday, September 13, 2016 11:25:21 AM CEST Valo, Kalle wrote: > Simon Wunderlich <sw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2016 10:59:31 AM CEST Valo, Kalle wrote: > >> Simon Wunderlich <sw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> > we have done some experiments last week on ath10k, trying to run mesh > >> > (802.11s) and access point at the same time, both encrypted. > >> > > >> > We have tested a recent LEDE (reboot-1519-g42f559e) but with > >> > firmware-5.bin_10.2.4.70.42-2 and the included wpa_supplicant, which > >> > gave > >> > us a working encrypted 802.11s network. However, starting an AP at the > >> > same time didn't work (AP doesn't beacon). This wasn't a problem when > >> > 802.11s was running unencrypted. > >> > > >> > We also tested version 10.2.4.97 (from codeaurora), which is now > >> > default > >> > in > >> > LEDE. However, this version apparently doesn't support 11s mesh at all > >> > (WMI_SERVICE_MESH_11S is disabled in the service map, but cfg/mac80211 > >> > advertises support). > >> > > >> > So here are my questions: > >> > * Did anyone succesfully run AP and mesh, both encrypted at the same > >> > time? > >> > * Do you have any pointers how we could fix this? Could it be fixable > >> > in > >> > the> > >> > > >> > driver (i.e. not in firmware)? > >> > > >> > * Does anyone have an idea if 11s will be supported in future > >> > versions? I > >> > > >> > didn't find any changelogs, but having 11s mode no longer in the > >> > service > >> > map does not make me optimistic. > >> > >> Why is LEDE using 10.2.4.97? It seems to be a quite old release and I > >> have no knowledge if anyone even tests that firmware branch with ath10k. > >> I recommend to only use firmware releases from ath10k-firmware.git as we > >> use those internally with ath10k. In any case, don't make any > >> assumptions about future from that firmware branch as it's so old. > > > > This was introduced in December 25th, 2015 after some firmware-related > > problems. I'm CC'ing Martin Blumenstingl who suggested this change. > > > > Since then, ath10k is pulling firmware from here (unless ct firmware is > > used): > > > > https://source.codeaurora.org/quic/qsdk/oss/firmware/ath10k-firmware/plain > > / > > 10.2.4/firmware-5.bin_10.2.4.97-1 > > > > However, I don't understand the numbering? 10.2.4.97 > 10.2.4.70, but you > > say 10.2.4.70.42-2 is more recent? I would have assumed otherwise from > > the numbers. However, 10.2.4.70 has much more sub-revisions. > > As I said before, I just deliver the firmware files to the community and > the firmware team creates the actual releases. But my understanding is > that these are from different branches which are built independently > (and might have different features, like in this case the mesh support) > so I would not make any conclusions if any firmware is "better" just > from the numbers alone. you are right ... those numbers are not a good pointer. I found this repo, and from the checkin dates it looks like 10.2.4.97 is indeed way older (from September 2015) than 10.2.4.70.42 (April 2016): https://source.codeaurora.org/quic/qsdk/oss/firmware/ath10k-firmware/log/10.2.4 I would agree that Changelogs would be helpful. Thanks for the clarification. We will then stick to the 70's branch then. Does anyone have pointers for the other questions? :) I would believe hat many people would be interested in running AP + Mesh encrypted at the same time (at least in the open source community ...). Thanks, Simon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
