Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:58037 "EHLO wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750985AbcE0Mo6 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 May 2016 08:44:58 -0400 From: "Valo, Kalle" To: Sven Eckelmann CC: "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ath10k: Add support for QCA9887 Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 12:44:52 +0000 Message-ID: <87wpmf4qm5.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (sfid-20160527_144542_073885_0D262FE8) References: <1568876.Six5hABE57@bentobox> <87mvnc67yq.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <1505571.v1gM3hzMhG@bentobox> In-Reply-To: <1505571.v1gM3hzMhG@bentobox> (Sven Eckelmann's message of "Fri, 27 May 2016 10:46:49 +0200") Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Sven Eckelmann writes: > On Thursday 26 May 2016 17:32:30 Valo, Kalle wrote: >> Sven Eckelmann writes: >> >> > the QCA9887 chip is similar to the QCA988x chips. But it requires a special >> > firmware and uses a different calibration data source. Unfortunately, no >> > working firmware currently exists. But it is possible to create a semi working >> > one by binary patching the current version. >> >> So what works and what doesn't? > > We currently stopped everything related to QCA9887 and so I cannot give you an > exhaustive list. But right now basic AP functionality seems to work. The > signal level, coverage and performance was rather bad. I cannot give you > numbers anymore because the two actual tests with QCA9887 were done 1 year ago > and 1/2 year ago (you know why ;) ). > > But maybe I should add that the results with the original AP147 firmware also > wasn't better. That doesn't sound good. Maybe a calibration issue? >> I can upload a new version. So I need to add these flags: >> >> ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_HAS_WMI_MGMT_TX >> ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_NO_P2P >> ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_SUPPORTS_SKIP_CLOCK_INIT >> >> Anything else? > > At least I didn't find more. I pushed a new firmware image firmware-5.bin_10.2.3.31.7-2 with those enabled: https://github.com/kvalo/ath10k-firmware/tree/master/QCA9887 >> Should we add a warning message to ath10k that the QCA9887 support is >> experimental? That way users don't need to wonder why there are so many >> problems. > > Yes, this would be a good idea. I personally wouldn't know where you want > to have this warning added. So maybe you just add it? Thanks Sure, I can add it. >> There were some conflicts in patch 1. I fixed those now and pushed the >> patches to the pending branch for further testing: >> >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/ath.git/log/?h=master-pending >> >> Unfortunately I don't have QCA9887 myself so I can't test these myself. >> I hope I didn't break anything. > > Ah, yes. The new patches "clean up growing hw checks during safe and full reset" > and some QCA9884 stuff seems to have created some conflicts. I have redone my > patches on top of them and compared with your solution. We came up with the > exact same conflict resolution. So you can at least say that I would also > have broken it ;) Good, so I would not get the blame myself ;) > I have just created a compat-wireless based on your branch which I've tested > it with my QCA9887 test card. No new problems were detected. Great, thanks for testing! -- Kalle Valo