Return-path: Received: from mail-la0-f52.google.com ([209.85.215.52]:39806 "EHLO mail-la0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750851AbbAKOQH (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jan 2015 09:16:07 -0500 Received: by mail-la0-f52.google.com with SMTP id hs14so21230382lab.11 for ; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 06:16:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <54B273E1.6030306@googlemail.com> References: <54B272F0.70307@googlemail.com> <54B273E1.6030306@googlemail.com> Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2015 16:16:04 +0200 Message-ID: (sfid-20150111_151616_228726_61E8EB58) Subject: Re: IWLWIFI - 3.18-stable From: Emmanuel Grumbach To: Chris Clayton Cc: kvalo@codeaurora.org, linux-wireless Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Chris, thank you for you analysis, it is very helpful > Doh! Cut and paste error ... > > On 01/11/15 12:56, Chris Clayton wrote: > > Hi Kalle, > > > > Having recently bought a new laptop, I've just started using the iwlwifi driver for wireless networking. I found both > > 3.18.x and the current development tree to be very unreliable due to frequent disconnections from the router. > > > > Before you merged them into your tree, I grabbed the latest fixes from iwlwifi-fixes tree and applied them to the > > development kernel. Since I did that I've had no problems at all with dropped connections. I then looked at each patch > > to see whether it might be applicable to 3.18 and found that two of them looked as if they should be useful. They are: > > > > c93edc639392df733c7d72db4376a9add775d18a - iwlwifi: mvm: don't allow diversity if BT Coex / TT forbid it > > The above should have been: > > c93edc639392df733c7d72db4376a9add775d18a - iwlwifi: mvm: fix Rx with both chains > > > > > a9dc5060bf3a32ac3dad472f15416054b92dc5b5 - iwlwifi: mvm: fix out of bounds access to tid_to_mac80211_ac > > > > With those two applied, I've had stable wireless networking on 3.18.2 and, more recently, 3.18.2. Consequently, they > > seem appropriate for tagging for 3.18-stable, but, as far as I can see, they haven't been tagged for stable. Apologies, > > if I'm mistaken, but if I'm not, could you consider submitting the two patches for inclusion in 3.18, please? Of course, > > they may be appropriate to earlier kernels too - I haven't looked. > > The first one (c93edc639392df733c7d72db4376a9add775d18a) is tagged for stable. Are you using bluetooth? Are you able to tell me which of the two really helps? Unless I am missing something, the first one (c93edc639392df733c7d72db4376a9add775d18a) should help only if you disabled power save. Is that the case?