Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:44074 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752336AbeBZKlj (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2018 05:41:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 16:11:38 +0530 From: periyasa@codeaurora.org To: Adrian Chadd Cc: ath10k@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, adrian.chadd@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "ath10k: send (re)assoc peer command when NSS changed" In-Reply-To: References: <1519625792-12010-1-git-send-email-periyasa@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <559965cc9735f6616957f9ee84a17e52@codeaurora.org> (sfid-20180226_114147_449152_1CCF7F6F) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2018-02-26 14:15, Adrian Chadd wrote: > hi! > > On 25 February 2018 at 22:16, Karthikeyan Periyasamy > wrote: >> This reverts commit 55884c045d31a29cf69db8332d1064a1b61dd159. >> >> When Ath10k is in AP mode and an unassociated STA sends a VHT action >> frame >> (Operating Mode Notification for the NSS change) periodically to AP >> this causes >> ath10k to call ath10k_station_assoc() which sends WMI_PEER_ASSOC_CMDID >> during >> NSS update. Over the time (with a certain client it can happen within >> 15 mins >> when there are over 500 of these VHT action frames) continuous calls >> of >> WMI_PEER_ASSOC_CMDID cause firmware to assert due to resource exhaust. >> >> To my knowledge setting WMI_PEER_NSS peer param itself enough to >> handle NSS >> updates and no need to call ath10k_station_assoc(). So revert the >> original >> commit from 2014 as it's unclear why the change was really needed. >> Now the firmware assert doesn't happen anymore. >> >> Issue observed in QCA9984 platform with firmware >> version:10.4-3.5.3-00053. >> This Change tested in QCA9984 with firmware version: 10.4-3.5.3-00053 >> and >> QCA988x platform with firmware version: 10.2.4-1.0-00036. > > Did you test this on any of the other major firmware variants? I > wonder if it snuck in because of some firmware quirk in something way > before dakota/cascade and 10.4 were a thing. > > Eg, Peregrine? Rome? Maybe even earlier Beeliner, just to double check? > Yes. I tested this on peregrine, Beeliner, Dakota and Cascade. This code was introduced before Rome. Thanks, Karthikeyan.