| Message ID | 1634554678-7993-1-git-send-email-loic.poulain@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 8a27ca39478270e07baf9c09aa0c99709769ba03 |
| Delegated to: | Kalle Valo |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/2] wcn36xx: Correct band/freq reporting on RX | expand |
On 18/10/2021 11:57, Loic Poulain wrote: > ieee80211_is_probe_resp(hdr->frame_control)) > status.boottime_ns = ktime_get_boottime_ns(); I think this is dangling in your tree, doesn't apply cleanly for me anyway Other than that Tested-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
On 18/10/2021 23:51, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: > On 18/10/2021 11:57, Loic Poulain wrote: >> ieee80211_is_probe_resp(hdr->frame_control)) >> status.boottime_ns = ktime_get_boottime_ns(); > > I think this is dangling in your tree, doesn't apply cleanly for me anyway > > Other than that > > Tested-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> Hmm. I'm told by a colleague with access to a router that has channel 144 - I do not BTW - that 144 is not showing up with the firmware offload scan. We should probably hold off on applying for the time being :( --- bod
Hi Bryan, Kalle, On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 at 02:26, Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 18/10/2021 23:51, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: > > On 18/10/2021 11:57, Loic Poulain wrote: > >> ieee80211_is_probe_resp(hdr->frame_control)) > >> status.boottime_ns = ktime_get_boottime_ns(); > > > > I think this is dangling in your tree, doesn't apply cleanly for me anyway > > > > Other than that > > > > Tested-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> > > Hmm. > > I'm told by a colleague with access to a router that has channel 144 - I > do not BTW - that 144 is not showing up with the firmware offload scan. > > We should probably hold off on applying for the time being :( So the missing channel 144 is due to a different problem, and is now fixed in a subsequent patch: wcn36xx: Channel list update before hardware scan So I think we can go with this change :-). Regards, Loic
On 20/10/2021 14:54, Loic Poulain wrote: > Hi Bryan, Kalle, > > On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 at 02:26, Bryan O'Donoghue > <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> On 18/10/2021 23:51, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: >>> On 18/10/2021 11:57, Loic Poulain wrote: >>>> ieee80211_is_probe_resp(hdr->frame_control)) >>>> status.boottime_ns = ktime_get_boottime_ns(); >>> >>> I think this is dangling in your tree, doesn't apply cleanly for me anyway >>> >>> Other than that >>> >>> Tested-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> >> >> Hmm. >> >> I'm told by a colleague with access to a router that has channel 144 - I >> do not BTW - that 144 is not showing up with the firmware offload scan. >> >> We should probably hold off on applying for the time being :( > > So the missing channel 144 is due to a different problem, and is now fixed > in a subsequent patch: > wcn36xx: Channel list update before hardware scan > > So I think we can go with this change :-). > > Regards, > Loic > Cool, nice job
Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> writes: > On 20/10/2021 14:54, Loic Poulain wrote: >> Hi Bryan, Kalle, >> >> On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 at 02:26, Bryan O'Donoghue >> <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 18/10/2021 23:51, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: >>>> On 18/10/2021 11:57, Loic Poulain wrote: >>>>> ieee80211_is_probe_resp(hdr->frame_control)) >>>>> status.boottime_ns = ktime_get_boottime_ns(); >>>> >>>> I think this is dangling in your tree, doesn't apply cleanly for me anyway >>>> >>>> Other than that >>>> >>>> Tested-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> >>> >>> Hmm. >>> >>> I'm told by a colleague with access to a router that has channel 144 - I >>> do not BTW - that 144 is not showing up with the firmware offload scan. >>> >>> We should probably hold off on applying for the time being :( >> >> So the missing channel 144 is due to a different problem, and is now fixed >> in a subsequent patch: >> wcn36xx: Channel list update before hardware scan >> >> So I think we can go with this change :-). >> >> Regards, >> Loic >> > > Cool, nice job I had already dropped this patch from my queue, but added it back now.
Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@linaro.org> wrote: > For packets originating from hardware scan, the channel and band is > included in the buffer descriptor (bd->rf_band & bd->rx_ch). > > For 2Ghz band the channel value is directly reported in the 4-bit > rx_ch field. For 5Ghz band, the rx_ch field contains a mapping > index (given the 4-bit limitation). > > The reserved0 value field is also used to extend 4-bit mapping to > 5-bit mapping to support more than 16 5Ghz channels. > > This change adds correct reporting of the frequency/band, that is > used in scan mechanism. And is required for 5Ghz hardware scan > support. > > Signed-off-by: Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@linaro.org> > Tested-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> 2 patches applied to ath-next branch of ath.git, thanks. 8a27ca394782 wcn36xx: Correct band/freq reporting on RX 2371b15f8eeb wcn36xx: Enable hardware scan offload for 5Ghz band
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/txrx.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/txrx.c index cab196b..a3ef497 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/txrx.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/txrx.c @@ -31,6 +31,13 @@ struct wcn36xx_rate { enum rate_info_bw bw; }; +/* Buffer descriptor rx_ch field is limited to 5-bit (4+1), a mapping is used + * for 11A Channels. + */ +static const u8 ab_rx_ch_map[] = { 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 100, 104, + 108, 112, 116, 120, 124, 128, 132, 136, 140, + 149, 153, 157, 161, 165, 144 }; + static const struct wcn36xx_rate wcn36xx_rate_table[] = { /* 11b rates */ { 10, 0, RX_ENC_LEGACY, 0, RATE_INFO_BW_20 }, @@ -291,6 +298,22 @@ int wcn36xx_rx_skb(struct wcn36xx *wcn, struct sk_buff *skb) ieee80211_is_probe_resp(hdr->frame_control)) status.boottime_ns = ktime_get_boottime_ns(); + if (bd->scan_learn) { + /* If packet originates from hardware scanning, extract the + * band/channel from bd descriptor. + */ + u8 hwch = (bd->reserved0 << 4) + bd->rx_ch; + + if (bd->rf_band != 1 && hwch <= sizeof(ab_rx_ch_map) && hwch >= 1) { + status.band = NL80211_BAND_5GHZ; + status.freq = ieee80211_channel_to_frequency(ab_rx_ch_map[hwch - 1], + status.band); + } else { + status.band = NL80211_BAND_2GHZ; + status.freq = ieee80211_channel_to_frequency(hwch, status.band); + } + } + memcpy(IEEE80211_SKB_RXCB(skb), &status, sizeof(status)); if (ieee80211_is_beacon(hdr->frame_control)) { diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/txrx.h b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/txrx.h index 032216e..b54311f 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/txrx.h +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/txrx.h @@ -110,7 +110,8 @@ struct wcn36xx_rx_bd { /* 0x44 */ u32 exp_seq_num:12; u32 cur_seq_num:12; - u32 fr_type_subtype:8; + u32 rf_band:2; + u32 fr_type_subtype:6; /* 0x48 */ u32 msdu_size:16;
For packets originating from hardware scan, the channel and band is included in the buffer descriptor (bd->rf_band & bd->rx_ch). For 2Ghz band the channel value is directly reported in the 4-bit rx_ch field. For 5Ghz band, the rx_ch field contains a mapping index (given the 4-bit limitation). The reserved0 value field is also used to extend 4-bit mapping to 5-bit mapping to support more than 16 5Ghz channels. This change adds correct reporting of the frequency/band, that is used in scan mechanism. And is required for 5Ghz hardware scan support. Signed-off-by: Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@linaro.org> --- drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/txrx.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/txrx.h | 3 ++- 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)