| Message ID | 20230519162324.1633120-1-greearb@candelatech.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Delegated to: | Johannes Berg |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2] wifi: mac80211: add eht_capa debugfs field. | expand |
> + /* TODO: Fix and re-add this. It compiles in 6.4 but not against 'next' > + * according to the kernel build bot. > + * PFLAG(PHY, 5, SUPP_EXTRA_EHT_LTF, "SUPP-EXTRA-EHT-LTF"); > + */ > Well that's because the spec version was updated in wireless-next :) So please adjust according to the new fields there. johannes
On 6/14/23 01:29, Johannes Berg wrote: > >> + /* TODO: Fix and re-add this. It compiles in 6.4 but not against 'next' >> + * according to the kernel build bot. >> + * PFLAG(PHY, 5, SUPP_EXTRA_EHT_LTF, "SUPP-EXTRA-EHT-LTF"); >> + */ >> > > Well that's because the spec version was updated in wireless-next :) > > So please adjust according to the new fields there. It will be some time before I get a chance to revisit this. If you can accept as is, I'll fix the remaining bits when I move to 6.5 or whatever mainline kernel has the updated spec. Or I can re-submit the full revised patch at that time. Thanks, Ben
On Wed, 2023-06-14 at 09:39 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > On 6/14/23 01:29, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > > + /* TODO: Fix and re-add this. It compiles in 6.4 but not against 'next' > > > + * according to the kernel build bot. > > > + * PFLAG(PHY, 5, SUPP_EXTRA_EHT_LTF, "SUPP-EXTRA-EHT-LTF"); > > > + */ > > > > > > > Well that's because the spec version was updated in wireless-next :) > > > > So please adjust according to the new fields there. > > It will be some time before I get a chance to revisit this. If you can > accept as is, I'll fix the remaining bits when I move to 6.5 or whatever > mainline kernel has the updated spec. > Actually I think it was just this field, so maybe I can just take v1. johannes
On 6/14/23 13:08, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2023-06-14 at 09:39 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >> On 6/14/23 01:29, Johannes Berg wrote: >>> >>>> + /* TODO: Fix and re-add this. It compiles in 6.4 but not against 'next' >>>> + * according to the kernel build bot. >>>> + * PFLAG(PHY, 5, SUPP_EXTRA_EHT_LTF, "SUPP-EXTRA-EHT-LTF"); >>>> + */ >>>> >>> >>> Well that's because the spec version was updated in wireless-next :) >>> >>> So please adjust according to the new fields there. >> >> It will be some time before I get a chance to revisit this. If you can >> accept as is, I'll fix the remaining bits when I move to 6.5 or whatever >> mainline kernel has the updated spec. >> > > Actually I think it was just this field, so maybe I can just take v1. After doing some more detailed testing, I notice that this capa logic is using the AP's capability list, and is not showing lowest common features. For instance, a 2x2 STA radio shows as this when connected to 4x4 AP: ... EHT bw <= 80 MHz, max NSS for MCS 8-9: Rx=4, Tx=4 EHT bw <= 80 MHz, max NSS for MCS 10-11: Rx=4, Tx=4 EHT bw <= 80 MHz, max NSS for MCS 12-13: Rx=4, Tx=4 EHT bw <= 160 MHz, max NSS for MCS 8-9: Rx=4, Tx=4 EHT bw <= 160 MHz, max NSS for MCS 10-11: Rx=4, Tx=4 EHT bw <= 160 MHz, max NSS for MCS 12-13: Rx=4, Tx=4 EHT bw <= 320 MHz, max NSS for MCS 8-9: Rx=4, Tx=4 EHT bw <= 320 MHz, max NSS for MCS 10-11: Rx=4, Tx=4 EHT bw <= 320 MHz, max NSS for MCS 12-13: Rx=4, Tx=4 I would expect it to show Rx=2, Tx=2 in this case. Any opinions on how or whether to change this? Do we already store a combined capabilities list somewhere in mac80211 for EHT? Thanks, Ben
On Wed, 2023-08-09 at 12:32 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > On 6/14/23 13:08, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2023-06-14 at 09:39 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > > > On 6/14/23 01:29, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > > > > > > + /* TODO: Fix and re-add this. It compiles in 6.4 but not against 'next' > > > > > + * according to the kernel build bot. > > > > > + * PFLAG(PHY, 5, SUPP_EXTRA_EHT_LTF, "SUPP-EXTRA-EHT-LTF"); > > > > > + */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well that's because the spec version was updated in wireless-next :) > > > > > > > > So please adjust according to the new fields there. > > > > > > It will be some time before I get a chance to revisit this. If you can > > > accept as is, I'll fix the remaining bits when I move to 6.5 or whatever > > > mainline kernel has the updated spec. > > > > > > > Actually I think it was just this field, so maybe I can just take v1. > > After doing some more detailed testing, I notice that this capa logic is using > the AP's capability list, and is not showing lowest common features. For instance, > a 2x2 STA radio shows as this when connected to 4x4 AP: > > ... > EHT bw <= 80 MHz, max NSS for MCS 8-9: Rx=4, Tx=4 > EHT bw <= 80 MHz, max NSS for MCS 10-11: Rx=4, Tx=4 > EHT bw <= 80 MHz, max NSS for MCS 12-13: Rx=4, Tx=4 > EHT bw <= 160 MHz, max NSS for MCS 8-9: Rx=4, Tx=4 > EHT bw <= 160 MHz, max NSS for MCS 10-11: Rx=4, Tx=4 > EHT bw <= 160 MHz, max NSS for MCS 12-13: Rx=4, Tx=4 > EHT bw <= 320 MHz, max NSS for MCS 8-9: Rx=4, Tx=4 > EHT bw <= 320 MHz, max NSS for MCS 10-11: Rx=4, Tx=4 > EHT bw <= 320 MHz, max NSS for MCS 12-13: Rx=4, Tx=4 > > I would expect it to show Rx=2, Tx=2 in this case. > > Any opinions on how or whether to change this? Do we already store a combined > capabilities list somewhere in mac80211 for EHT? > We did this for HT and VHT, and then kind of stopped for HE because it got so asymmetric and complicated ... it ended up easier for drivers to do it because they have their own hardware limitations and all and know what they may or may not advertise, and mac80211 would have to do it _all_. Yeah, not ideal either. So dunno. I wouldn't mind the logic I guess and we could probably remove stuff from the drivers, but either we'd have to be really careful about what we do and don't handle, and probably check that against what drivers have, or handle everything which gets difficult. johannes
On 8/9/23 12:34, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2023-08-09 at 12:32 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >> On 6/14/23 13:08, Johannes Berg wrote: >>> On Wed, 2023-06-14 at 09:39 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >>>> On 6/14/23 01:29, Johannes Berg wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> + /* TODO: Fix and re-add this. It compiles in 6.4 but not against 'next' >>>>>> + * according to the kernel build bot. >>>>>> + * PFLAG(PHY, 5, SUPP_EXTRA_EHT_LTF, "SUPP-EXTRA-EHT-LTF"); >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Well that's because the spec version was updated in wireless-next :) >>>>> >>>>> So please adjust according to the new fields there. >>>> >>>> It will be some time before I get a chance to revisit this. If you can >>>> accept as is, I'll fix the remaining bits when I move to 6.5 or whatever >>>> mainline kernel has the updated spec. >>>> >>> >>> Actually I think it was just this field, so maybe I can just take v1. >> >> After doing some more detailed testing, I notice that this capa logic is using >> the AP's capability list, and is not showing lowest common features. For instance, >> a 2x2 STA radio shows as this when connected to 4x4 AP: >> >> ... >> EHT bw <= 80 MHz, max NSS for MCS 8-9: Rx=4, Tx=4 >> EHT bw <= 80 MHz, max NSS for MCS 10-11: Rx=4, Tx=4 >> EHT bw <= 80 MHz, max NSS for MCS 12-13: Rx=4, Tx=4 >> EHT bw <= 160 MHz, max NSS for MCS 8-9: Rx=4, Tx=4 >> EHT bw <= 160 MHz, max NSS for MCS 10-11: Rx=4, Tx=4 >> EHT bw <= 160 MHz, max NSS for MCS 12-13: Rx=4, Tx=4 >> EHT bw <= 320 MHz, max NSS for MCS 8-9: Rx=4, Tx=4 >> EHT bw <= 320 MHz, max NSS for MCS 10-11: Rx=4, Tx=4 >> EHT bw <= 320 MHz, max NSS for MCS 12-13: Rx=4, Tx=4 >> >> I would expect it to show Rx=2, Tx=2 in this case. >> >> Any opinions on how or whether to change this? Do we already store a combined >> capabilities list somewhere in mac80211 for EHT? >> > > We did this for HT and VHT, and then kind of stopped for HE because it > got so asymmetric and complicated ... it ended up easier for drivers to > do it because they have their own hardware limitations and all and know > what they may or may not advertise, and mac80211 would have to do it > _all_. Yeah, not ideal either. So dunno. I wouldn't mind the logic I > guess and we could probably remove stuff from the drivers, but either > we'd have to be really careful about what we do and don't handle, and > probably check that against what drivers have, or handle everything > which gets difficult. Yeah, I'm not excited to write a large pile of new and mostly duplicated logic just for better debugfs output. The main thing I want out of this is current-negotiated-bandwidth and current-negotiated-nss. I can hack that in one way or another. Another option: If mac80211 already knows the STA's own capabilities, that could be added to this debugfs file, and then user-space could deal with finding the least common demoninator for that it cares about? But does mac80211 even store a precise capa list for the station's current association? Thanks, Ben
diff --git a/net/mac80211/debugfs_sta.c b/net/mac80211/debugfs_sta.c index 607ba9367738..5c87f601c572 100644 --- a/net/mac80211/debugfs_sta.c +++ b/net/mac80211/debugfs_sta.c @@ -1239,6 +1239,194 @@ static ssize_t link_sta_he_capa_read(struct file *file, char __user *userbuf, } LINK_STA_OPS(he_capa); +static ssize_t link_sta_eht_capa_read(struct file *file, char __user *userbuf, + size_t count, loff_t *ppos) +{ + char *buf, *p; + size_t buf_sz = PAGE_SIZE; + struct link_sta_info *link_sta = file->private_data; + struct ieee80211_sta_eht_cap *bec = &link_sta->pub->eht_cap; + struct ieee80211_eht_cap_elem_fixed *fixed = &bec->eht_cap_elem; + struct ieee80211_eht_mcs_nss_supp *nss = &bec->eht_mcs_nss_supp; + u8 *cap; + int i; + ssize_t ret; + static const char *mcs_desc[] = { "0-7", "8-9", "10-11", "12-13"}; + + buf = kmalloc(buf_sz, GFP_KERNEL); + if (!buf) + return -ENOMEM; + p = buf; + + p += scnprintf(p, buf_sz + buf - p, "EHT %ssupported\n", + bec->has_eht ? "" : "not "); + if (!bec->has_eht) + goto out; + + p += scnprintf(p, buf_sz + buf - p, + "MAC-CAP: %#.2x %#.2x\n", + fixed->mac_cap_info[0], fixed->mac_cap_info[1]); + p += scnprintf(p, buf_sz + buf - p, + "PHY-CAP: %#.2x %#.2x %#.2x %#.2x %#.2x %#.2x %#.2x %#.2x %#.2x\n", + fixed->phy_cap_info[0], fixed->phy_cap_info[1], + fixed->phy_cap_info[2], fixed->phy_cap_info[3], + fixed->phy_cap_info[4], fixed->phy_cap_info[5], + fixed->phy_cap_info[6], fixed->phy_cap_info[7], + fixed->phy_cap_info[8]); + +#define PRINT(fmt, ...) \ + p += scnprintf(p, buf_sz + buf - p, "\t\t" fmt "\n", \ + ##__VA_ARGS__) + +#define PFLAG(t, n, a, b) \ + do { \ + if (cap[n] & IEEE80211_EHT_##t##_CAP##n##_##a) \ + PRINT("%s", b); \ + } while (0) + + cap = fixed->mac_cap_info; + PFLAG(MAC, 0, EPCS_PRIO_ACCESS, "EPCS-PRIO-ACCESS"); + PFLAG(MAC, 0, OM_CONTROL, "OM-CONTROL"); + PFLAG(MAC, 0, TRIG_TXOP_SHARING_MODE1, "TRIG-TXOP-SHARING-MODE1"); + PFLAG(MAC, 0, TRIG_TXOP_SHARING_MODE2, "TRIG-TXOP-SHARING-MODE2"); + PFLAG(MAC, 0, RESTRICTED_TWT, "RESTRICTED-TWT"); + PFLAG(MAC, 0, SCS_TRAFFIC_DESC, "SCS-TRAFFIC-DESC"); + switch ((cap[0] & 0xc0) >> 6) { + case IEEE80211_EHT_MAC_CAP0_MAX_MPDU_LEN_3895: + PRINT("MAX-MPDU-LEN: 3985"); + break; + case IEEE80211_EHT_MAC_CAP0_MAX_MPDU_LEN_7991: + PRINT("MAX-MPDU-LEN: 7991"); + break; + case IEEE80211_EHT_MAC_CAP0_MAX_MPDU_LEN_11454: + PRINT("MAX-MPDU-LEN: 11454"); + break; + } + + cap = fixed->phy_cap_info; + PFLAG(PHY, 0, 320MHZ_IN_6GHZ, "320MHZ-IN-6GHZ"); + PFLAG(PHY, 0, 242_TONE_RU_GT20MHZ, "242-TONE-RU-GT20MHZ"); + PFLAG(PHY, 0, NDP_4_EHT_LFT_32_GI, "NDP-4-EHT-LFT-32-GI"); + PFLAG(PHY, 0, PARTIAL_BW_UL_MU_MIMO, "PARTIAL-BW-UL-MU-MIMO"); + PFLAG(PHY, 0, SU_BEAMFORMER, "SU-BEAMFORMER"); + PFLAG(PHY, 0, SU_BEAMFORMEE, "SU-BEAMFORMEE"); + i = cap[0] >> 7; + i |= (cap[1] & 0x3) << 1; + PRINT("BEAMFORMEE-80-NSS: %i", i); + PRINT("BEAMFORMEE-160-NSS: %i", (cap[1] >> 2) & 0x7); + PRINT("BEAMFORMEE-320-NSS: %i", (cap[1] >> 5) & 0x7); + PRINT("SOUNDING-DIM-80-NSS: %i", (cap[2] & 0x7)); + PRINT("SOUNDING-DIM-160-NSS: %i", (cap[2] >> 3) & 0x7); + i = cap[2] >> 6; + i |= (cap[3] & 0x1) << 3; + PRINT("SOUNDING-DIM-320-NSS: %i", i); + + PFLAG(PHY, 3, NG_16_SU_FEEDBACK, "NG-16-SU-FEEDBACK"); + PFLAG(PHY, 3, NG_16_MU_FEEDBACK, "NG-16-MU-FEEDBACK"); + PFLAG(PHY, 3, CODEBOOK_4_2_SU_FDBK, "CODEBOOK-4-2-SU-FDBK"); + PFLAG(PHY, 3, CODEBOOK_7_5_MU_FDBK, "CODEBOOK-7-5-MU-FDBK"); + PFLAG(PHY, 3, TRIG_SU_BF_FDBK, "TRIG-SU-BF-FDBK"); + PFLAG(PHY, 3, TRIG_MU_BF_PART_BW_FDBK, "TRIG-MU-BF-PART-BW-FDBK"); + PFLAG(PHY, 3, TRIG_CQI_FDBK, "TRIG-CQI-FDBK"); + + PFLAG(PHY, 4, PART_BW_DL_MU_MIMO, "PART-BW-DL-MU-MIMO"); + PFLAG(PHY, 4, PSR_SR_SUPP, "PSR-SR-SUPP"); + PFLAG(PHY, 4, POWER_BOOST_FACT_SUPP, "POWER-BOOST-FACT-SUPP"); + PFLAG(PHY, 4, EHT_MU_PPDU_4_EHT_LTF_08_GI, "EHT-MU-PPDU-4-EHT-LTF-08-GI"); + PRINT("MAX_NC: %i", cap[4] >> 4); + + PFLAG(PHY, 5, NON_TRIG_CQI_FEEDBACK, "NON-TRIG-CQI-FEEDBACK"); + PFLAG(PHY, 5, TX_LESS_242_TONE_RU_SUPP, "TX-LESS-242-TONE-RU-SUPP"); + PFLAG(PHY, 5, RX_LESS_242_TONE_RU_SUPP, "RX-LESS-242-TONE-RU-SUPP"); + PFLAG(PHY, 5, PPE_THRESHOLD_PRESENT, "PPE_THRESHOLD_PRESENT"); + switch (cap[5] >> 4 & 0x3) { + case IEEE80211_EHT_PHY_CAP5_COMMON_NOMINAL_PKT_PAD_0US: + PRINT("NOMINAL_PKT_PAD: 0us"); + break; + case IEEE80211_EHT_PHY_CAP5_COMMON_NOMINAL_PKT_PAD_8US: + PRINT("NOMINAL_PKT_PAD: 8us"); + break; + case IEEE80211_EHT_PHY_CAP5_COMMON_NOMINAL_PKT_PAD_16US: + PRINT("NOMINAL_PKT_PAD: 16us"); + break; + case IEEE80211_EHT_PHY_CAP5_COMMON_NOMINAL_PKT_PAD_20US: + PRINT("NOMINAL_PKT_PAD: 20us"); + break; + } + + i = cap[5] >> 6; + i |= cap[6] & 0x7; + PRINT("MAX-NUM-SUPP-EHT-LTF: %i", i); + /* TODO: Fix and re-add this. It compiles in 6.4 but not against 'next' + * according to the kernel build bot. + * PFLAG(PHY, 5, SUPP_EXTRA_EHT_LTF, "SUPP-EXTRA-EHT-LTF"); + */ + + i = (cap[6] >> 3) & 0xf; + PRINT("MCS15-SUPP-MASK: %i", i); + PFLAG(PHY, 6, EHT_DUP_6GHZ_SUPP, "EHT-DUP-6GHZ-SUPP"); + + PFLAG(PHY, 7, 20MHZ_STA_RX_NDP_WIDER_BW, "20MHZ-STA-RX-NDP-WIDER-BW"); + PFLAG(PHY, 7, NON_OFDMA_UL_MU_MIMO_80MHZ, "NON-OFDMA-UL-MU-MIMO-80MHZ"); + PFLAG(PHY, 7, NON_OFDMA_UL_MU_MIMO_160MHZ, "NON-OFDMA-UL-MU-MIMO-160MHZ"); + PFLAG(PHY, 7, NON_OFDMA_UL_MU_MIMO_320MHZ, "NON-OFDMA-UL-MU-MIMO-320MHZ"); + PFLAG(PHY, 7, MU_BEAMFORMER_80MHZ, "MU-BEAMFORMER-80MHZ"); + PFLAG(PHY, 7, MU_BEAMFORMER_160MHZ, "MU-BEAMFORMER-160MHZ"); + PFLAG(PHY, 7, MU_BEAMFORMER_320MHZ, "MU-BEAMFORMER-320MHZ"); + PFLAG(PHY, 7, TB_SOUNDING_FDBK_RATE_LIMIT, "TB-SOUNDING-FDBK-RATE-LIMIT"); + + PFLAG(PHY, 8, RX_1024QAM_WIDER_BW_DL_OFDMA, "RX-1024QAM-WIDER-BW-DL-OFDMA"); + PFLAG(PHY, 8, RX_4096QAM_WIDER_BW_DL_OFDMA, "RX-4096QAM-WIDER-BW-DL-OFDMA"); + +#undef PFLAG + + PRINT(""); /* newline */ + if (!(link_sta->pub->he_cap.he_cap_elem.phy_cap_info[0] & + IEEE80211_HE_PHY_CAP0_CHANNEL_WIDTH_SET_MASK_ALL)) { + u8 *mcs_vals = (u8 *)(&nss->only_20mhz); + + for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) + PRINT("EHT bw=20 MHz, max NSS for MCS %s: Rx=%u, Tx=%u", + mcs_desc[i], + mcs_vals[i] & 0xf, mcs_vals[i] >> 4); + } else { + u8 *mcs_vals = (u8 *)(&nss->bw._80); + + for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) + PRINT("EHT bw <= 80 MHz, max NSS for MCS %s: Rx=%u, Tx=%u", + mcs_desc[i + 1], + mcs_vals[i] & 0xf, mcs_vals[i] >> 4); + + mcs_vals = (u8 *)(&nss->bw._160); + for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) + PRINT("EHT bw <= 160 MHz, max NSS for MCS %s: Rx=%u, Tx=%u", + mcs_desc[i + 1], + mcs_vals[i] & 0xf, mcs_vals[i] >> 4); + + mcs_vals = (u8 *)(&nss->bw._320); + for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) + PRINT("EHT bw <= 320 MHz, max NSS for MCS %s: Rx=%u, Tx=%u", + mcs_desc[i + 1], + mcs_vals[i] & 0xf, mcs_vals[i] >> 4); + } + + if (cap[5] & IEEE80211_EHT_PHY_CAP5_PPE_THRESHOLD_PRESENT) { + u8 ppe_size = ieee80211_eht_ppe_size(bec->eht_ppe_thres[0], cap); + + p += scnprintf(p, buf_sz + buf - p, "EHT PPE Thresholds: "); + for (i = 0; i < ppe_size; i++) + p += scnprintf(p, buf_sz + buf - p, "0x%02x ", + bec->eht_ppe_thres[i]); + PRINT(""); /* newline */ + } + +out: + ret = simple_read_from_buffer(userbuf, count, ppos, buf, p - buf); + kfree(buf); + return ret; +} +LINK_STA_OPS(eht_capa); + #define DEBUGFS_ADD(name) \ debugfs_create_file(#name, 0400, \ sta->debugfs_dir, sta, &sta_ ##name## _ops) @@ -1333,6 +1521,7 @@ void ieee80211_link_sta_debugfs_add(struct link_sta_info *link_sta) DEBUGFS_ADD(ht_capa); DEBUGFS_ADD(vht_capa); DEBUGFS_ADD(he_capa); + DEBUGFS_ADD(eht_capa); DEBUGFS_ADD_COUNTER(rx_duplicates, rx_stats.num_duplicates); DEBUGFS_ADD_COUNTER(rx_fragments, rx_stats.fragments);