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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAA=hcWT=RQBxB1-FT11awQz1SYK0qWp0PnvTSFrX9+V-nEgUnA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA=hcWTEnYraPy5Un7a7ryeDBJmf0KoCU2VoJjr5LJWtbc9j_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <c76ff8bb50164eeb86feeb2eba76beac@bshg.com> <CAA=hcWT=RQBxB1-FT11awQz1SYK0qWp0PnvTSFrX9+V-nEgUnA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   JH <jupiter.hce@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Jan 2020 12:33:54 +1100
Message-ID: <CAA=hcWRee3AeZatORMhvRTUwPVKPOnXwidu0cK4cbjwHw_opDw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Strange inconsistant WiFi network behaviour
To:     Emil Petersky <emil.petersky@streamunlimited.com>
Cc:     linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        connman <connman@lists.01.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 1/30/20, JH <jupiter.hce@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Emil and Jan,
>
> On 1/29/20, Ryll, Jan (GED-SDD2) <Jan.Ryll@bshg.com> wrote:
>> Try to increase distance from router or other WiFi device.
>
> Tried, but no avail.

Sorry Emil, I had spoken too soon, it is connected now. Why that
means, RF noise or interference from another device?

>> there are WiFi routers like AVM which are implement the WiFi Stack in a
>> stricter way than other routers or other WiFi chips-firmware.
>> I mention this cause weh ad some issue with a cypress wifi firmware which
>> leads to "sometimes" disconnect from routers. And we figured out that
>> this
>> was mostly the case with AVM. We are in contact with AVM in it turns out
>> that the AVM router work proberly. The issues was with the cypress
>> chipset
>> firmware. Now we are in contact with cypress and they accepted the issue.
>> So it is not always a connman problem :-) .
>
> That really worries me, my WiFi router is TP-Link AC1200 dual band
> router, it should have no problem for my device to connect it as I
> mentioned I have two devices one could connected without any issues.
> that definitely won't be my WiFi chip uBlox Lily issues, if it was,
> the another unit would not be possible to connect to my WiFi router in
> office.
>
> I am not saying it is connman problem or mwifiex problem or kernel
> problem, what I like is to get  helps and clues from open source
> communities to help me to debug and to find issues, it could be my
> contributions as well if there could be potential open source bugs to
> be found from my test, debug and report :-).
>
> Thank you.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> - jh
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: JH <jupiter.hce@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 10:22 AM
>> To: linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>; connman
>> <connman@lists.01.org>
>> Subject: Strange inconsistant WiFi network behaviour
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have 2 iMX6 devices running uBlox Lily WiFi, mrvl firmware
>> sd8801_uapsta.bin in kernel 4.19.75. In my office, a WiFi router is just
>> 1
>> meter away, the WiFi signal should not be a problem. One device could
>> connect to the WiFi router well and stably, one could not, here were
>> error
>> messages:
>>
>> [  408.990029] ieee80211 phy0: mwifiex_cfg80211_sched_scan_start :
>> Invalid Sched_scan parameters
>> .....................
>>
>> [56.986414] ieee80211 phy0: mwifiex_cfg80211_sched_scan_start :
>> Invalid Sched_scan parameter
>>
>> connmand[13469]:
>> ../connman-1.35/src/service.c:preferred_tech_add_by_type() type 5 service
>> 0x119120 Telstra
>> connmand[13469]: ../connman-1.35/src/service.c:auto_connect_service()
>> preferred 1 sessions 0 reason auto
>> connmand[13469]: ../connman-1.35/src/ntp.c:send_timeout() send timeout
>> 2 (retries 0)
>> connmand[13469]:
>> ../connman-1.35/plugins/ofono.c:netreg_update_strength() /ubloxqmi_2
>> Strength 80
>> connmand[13469]: ../connman-1.35/src/ntp.c:send_timeout() send timeout
>> 4 (retries 1)
>> connmand[13469]: ../connman-1.35/plugins/wifi.c:throw_wifi_scan()
>> device 0x118da8 0x116c78
>> connmand[13469]:
>> ../connman-1.35/src/device.c:connman_device_ref_debug() 0x118da8 ref 4 by
>> ../connman-1.35/plugins/wifi.c:1214:throw_wifi_scan()
>> connmand[13469]:
>> ../connman-1.35/src/device.c:connman_device_set_scanning() device
>> 0x118da8 scanning 1
>> connmand[13469]:
>> ../connman-1.35/src/technology.c:__connman_technology_scan_started()
>> device 0x118da8
>> connmand[13469]: ../connman-1.35/plugins/wifi.c:autoscan_timeout()
>> interval
>> 27
>> connmand[13469]: ../connman-1.35/plugins/wifi.c:interface_state() wifi
>> 0x11a7c8 interface state 4
>> connmand[13469]: ../connman-1.35/plugins/wifi.c:scan_started()
>> connmand[13469]: ../connman-1.35/src/rtnl.c:rtnl_message() NEWLINK len
>> 56 type 16 flags 0x0000 seq 0 pid 0
>> connmand[13469]: ../connman-1.35/plugins/wifi.c:scan_finished()
>> connmand[13469]: ../connman-1.35/plugins/wifi.c:interface_state() wifi
>> 0x11a7c8 interface state 3
>>
>> Both devices were installed the same firmware and software, if it was
>> firmware / software issues, both would not be able to connect to WiFi, as
>> one device could connect to the office WiFi router well, it could not the
>> WiFi router problem either.
>>
>> If I move the faulty one to my home, it could connect to my home WiFi, so
>> the device does not have WiFi problem, that is really confusing, what
>> could
>> cause that kind problem and how to debug and fix it?
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> - jh
>> _______________________________________________
>> connman mailing list -- connman@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email
>> to
>> connman-leave@lists.01.org
>>
>