Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:34938 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750794AbdKUGNi (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 01:13:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 11:43:36 +0530 From: akolli@codeaurora.org To: Kalle Valo Cc: Peter Oh , Sven Eckelmann , Sebastian Gottschall , ath10k@lists.infradead.org, Anilkumar Kolli , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: ath10k: Fix reported HT MCS rates with NSS > 1 In-Reply-To: <87po8df8wc.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> References: <20170511090930.18205-1-sven.eckelmann@openmesh.com> <1728147.6Xy77nSgBU@bentobox> <1960925.hkIbv4gX65@bentobox> <87po8df8wc.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Message-ID: (sfid-20171121_071341_520905_7AA590F9) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2017-11-20 17:40, Kalle Valo wrote: > Peter Oh writes: > >> On 11/06/2017 01:02 AM, Sven Eckelmann wrote: >>> On Montag, 6. November 2017 09:28:42 CET Sebastian Gottschall wrote: >>>> Am 06.11.2017 um 09:23 schrieb Sven Eckelmann: >>>>> On Sonntag, 5. November 2017 10:22:22 CET Sebastian Gottschall >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> the assumption made in this patch is obviously wrong (at least for >>>>>> more >>>>>> recent firmwares and 9984) >>>>>> my log is flooded with messages like >>>>>> [208802.803537] ath10k_pci 0001:03:00.0: Invalid VHT mcs 15 peer >>>>>> stats >>>>>> [208805.108515] ath10k_pci 0001:03:00.0: Invalid VHT mcs 15 peer >>>>>> stats >>>>>> [208821.747621] ath10k_pci 0001:03:00.0: Invalid VHT mcs 15 peer >>>>>> stats >>>>>> [208822.516599] ath10k_pci 0001:03:00.0: Invalid VHT mcs 15 peer >>>>>> stats >>>>>> [208841.257780] ath10k_pci 0001:03:00.0: Invalid VHT mcs 15 peer >>>>>> stats >>> [...] >>>>> This patch only splits WMI_RATE_PREAMBLE_HT & >>>>> WMI_RATE_PREAMBLE_VHT. And for >>>>> WMI_RATE_PREAMBLE_HT (*not VHT*), it uses a slightly different >>>>> approach. But >>>>> the WMI_RATE_PREAMBLE_VHT part (which you see in your logs) is >>>>> basically >>>>> untouched. >>>> then a question follows up. is this check really neccessary? >>> Until we find out what the heck VHT MCS 15 should mean in this >>> context - maybe. >>> But to the message - no, the message is most likely not necessary for >>> each >>> received "invalid" peer tx stat. >> >> This validation check expects peer tx stat packets from FW contain >> reasonable values and gives warning if values are different from >> expectation. The problem comes from the assumption that "it always >> contains reasonable stat value" which is wrong at least based on my >> results. For instance, the reason MCS == 15 is because all 4 bits of >> mcs potion set to 1, not because FW really sets it to 15 >> intentionally. when the mcs potion bits are set to all 1s, the other >> bits such as nss are also set to all 1s. >> Hence it looks FW passed totally invalid stat info to me. >> >> I don't have preference on whether it's better to split VHT and HT >> check or not, but it is more appropriate to change that warning level >> to debug level. > > I think we should add a special case to not print the warning if mcs == > 15 until we figure out what it means. Fix identified in Firmware and will push ASAP. -- Anil.