On 12/15/2016 07:22 AM, Jean-Pierre Tosoni wrote:
Jouni,
Thanks for the suggestion, I already tried something like this in wmi.c,
with the same result:
- Before patching the firmware scans DFS channels actively (with probes).
- After patching, the firmware scans DFS channels passively *until* any
beacon is received on the DFS channel. When *any* beacon is seen, the
firmware decides to scan actively on its own, without any new IR/RADAR
info from the driver.
So, your patch is required but not sufficient.
Somehow I was able to overcome this by reloading the regulation domain
in the radio card before each scan request:
////// awful patch ahead ////////
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
@@ -2842,7 +2842,9 @@ static int ath10k_update_channel_list(st
ch->chan_radar =
!!(channel->flags & IEEE80211_CHAN_RADAR);
- passive = channel->flags & IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_IR;
+ passive = channel->flags & (IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_IR |
+ IEEE80211_CHAN_RADAR);
So, should we add a new flag in firmware and driver that means 'really-no-IR', or
should the NO_IR flag here just always make the firmware never do IR when probing
regardless of whether it has seen beacons or not?
Thanks,
Ben
+
ch->passive = passive;
ch->freq = channel->center_freq;
@@ -3548,6 +3550,9 @@ static int ath10k_start_scan(struct ath1
lockdep_assert_held(&ar->conf_mutex);
+ if (ar->state == ATH10K_STATE_ON)
+ ath10k_regd_update(ar);
+
ret = ath10k_wmi_start_scan(ar, arg);
if (ret)
return ret;
////////////////////////////////////////
...But this sets a terrible penalty on performance when applied to
background scan.
On 12/14/16 20:58 Jouni Malinen wrote:
On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 06:02:52PM +0100, Jean-Pierre Tosoni wrote:
This follows on the previous discussion
"Client station sends probes on DFS channels"
Problem:
The combination of QCA988X firmware v10.2.4.70-2 + ath10k +
wpa_supplicant do not comply with the norm ETSI/EN 301-893 section
4.7; because they can send probes for 600s when no AP is around.
Analysis:
The problem seems to lie in the firmware, which regards the presence
of *any* beacon as a proof that the channel is radar-clean for 600s.
I don't think this is really firmware, but cfg80211 regulatory code and
how it interacts with ath10k..
- there is no obvious fix working in ath10k.
- the issue does not show up with other mac80211 devices like ath9k.
- wpa_supplicant considers this is a kernel issue [2]
There seems to be a difference between ath9k (mac80211-based Probe Request
frame sending) and ath10k (firmware) in this area for active scanning.
mac80211 uses IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_IR | IEEE80211_CHAN_RADAR while ath10k
uses IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_IR. I'd assume this difference results in ath10k
using cfg80211 beacon hints (etc.) to update the NO_IR flag and that might
be behind the difference you see.
Could you check whether the following change gets you the behavior you
want to see here? I have not had a chance to test this yet, but based on
code review, it looks like something that brings the same behavior to
ath10k that ath9k has for this through mac80211.
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
index aa545a1..758dbbd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
@@ -2973,7 +2973,8 @@ static int ath10k_update_channel_list(struct ath10k
*ar)
ch->chan_radar =
!!(channel->flags & IEEE80211_CHAN_RADAR);
- passive = channel->flags & IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_IR;
+ passive = channel->flags & (IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_IR |
+ IEEE80211_CHAN_RADAR);
ch->passive = passive;
ch->freq = channel->center_freq;
--
Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA
_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
--
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
