Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] ath10k: provide survey info as accumulated data
To:     Sven Eckelmann <sven@narfation.org>
Cc:     ath10k@lists.infradead.org, vnaralas@codeaurora.org,
        linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
References: <20190918124259.17804-1-sven@narfation.org>
 <9a9ec99b-9643-7288-eed5-b549a9fe1487@newmedia-net.de>
 <1614044.H5m0Cyd3Ly@bentobox>
From:   Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@newmedia-net.de>
Message-ID: <c51d8bce-d51d-fe77-d756-036f719eb4f4@newmedia-net.de>
Date:   Mon, 14 Oct 2019 11:32:41 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1614044.H5m0Cyd3Ly@bentobox>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

10.4 has additional 64 bit cycle counters. see wmi_pdev_bss_chan_info_event

the standard 32 cycle counters do individual wrap around as far as i know

Am 14.10.2019 um 09:07 schrieb Sven Eckelmann:
> On Monday, 14 October 2019 00:15:20 CEST Sebastian Gottschall wrote:
>> i checked your patch on 10.4 based chipsets with 9984. the values are
>> now looking bogus and wrong at all. busy and active time time in ms does
>> increase in hours each second
>> the problem seem to be that your patch is 10.2.4 only related.
>> ath_clean_survey does not trigger on 10.4 so the values double itself
>> each time the event raises since you add the full values and not just a
>> delta on top
> Thanks for the feedback. So we have now a firmware 10.2.4 which is 
> counting
> busy + active up and has wraparound problems. And then we have a 10.4 
> firmware
> (on QCA9888 and QCA4019) which is clearing everything as expected with
> WMI_BSS_SURVEY_REQ_TYPE_READ_CLEAR? and then we have some 10.4 
> firmware (one
> QCA9984) which behaves more like ath 10.2.4 firmware but is marked as
> ATH10K_HW_CC_WRAP_SHIFTED_EACH like the QCA4019.
>
> So I have no idea how to fix this when QCA4019 and QCA9984 are currently
> marked the same but behave differently. Does somebody have a overview 
> how the
> different HW versions should behave or is there some special bit in 
> the data
> reported by the firmware which can be used to evaluate the expected 
> behavior?
>
> Kind regards,
> ????Sven