Return-path: Received: from mail.w1.fi ([212.71.239.96]:43218 "EHLO li674-96.members.linode.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161175AbaKNRgw (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Nov 2014 12:36:52 -0500 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 19:36:48 +0200 From: Jouni Malinen To: Karl Beldan Cc: Johannes Berg , Karl Beldan , linux-wireless , Felix Fietkau Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] mac80211: minstrel_ht: add basic support for VHT rates <= 3SS@80MHz Message-ID: <20141114173648.GA31675@w1.fi> (sfid-20141114_183655_159612_DBB831D7) References: <1413812762-6605-5-git-send-email-karl.beldan@gmail.com> <1413880718-31273-1-git-send-email-karl.beldan@gmail.com> <20141114164328.GA30967@w1.fi> <20141114171832.GA16541@magnum.frso.rivierawaves.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20141114171832.GA16541@magnum.frso.rivierawaves.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 06:18:32PM +0100, Karl Beldan wrote: > Yes, only with iw and nothing fancy, I also have had it running on some > boards for some weeks as is and with rfc version for more than a year at > work (minstrel not the whole tree). > I guess I can take the tip of wireless-testing but can you give your > HEAD though ? It looks like pretty much any snapshot between master-2014-11-04 and now is affected.. Anyway, the current master snapshot in my tests was 0e204e2422876c18034ca960c4fccf727a02a5c1. > > For example, with nfc_p2p_go_neg test case: > > Have you reproduced it with other testcases (maybe more regular so that > I can get my hands on it faster) ? > Is it also happening when VHT support is not advertized by upper layers > ? This seems to be specific to exact timing of frames since the same issue does not show up in non-NFC P2P test cases. So no, this does not show up with anything else than the nfc_p2p_* test cases (well, at least not in my desktop+kvm setup; YMMV with other CPU speeds that could potentially affect timing): nfc_p2p_go_neg nfc_p2p_go_neg_reverse nfc_p2p_ip_addr_assignment nfc_p2p_static_handover_tagdev_client nfc_p2p_static_handover_tagdev_client_group_iface nfc_p2p_static_handover_tagdev_go I'd assume the key here is in P2P with NFC trigger having the fastest possible connection process due to all the optimizations in channel selection on WPS (which is those EAPOL Data frames that hit these rate selection issues immediately after association). That said, if you use the tests/hwsim scripts from git://w1.fi/hostap.git there should be no difference on running some of these cases vs. something more regular.. If you have not used these test scripts previously, you can find more information about the setup here: http://w1.fi/cgit/hostap/plain/tests/hwsim/README http://w1.fi/cgit/hostap/plain/tests/hwsim/vm/README -- Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA