Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:27:30 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Stefan Farfeleder <stefanf@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org" <freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org> Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r257133 - head/sys/dev/iwn Message-ID: <CAJ-Vmo==K73JC-0_nFT0X2sde2=mCbyWCUgEH%2BdiXbEzDgLxzw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmomEQQ=q9P3m2v4AypbZvq%2BaAxnjyupkKBVPqPBMvWEjnQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <201310251944.r9PJis6q004419@svn.freebsd.org> <20131027101106.GA2843@mole.fafoe.narf.at> <CAJ-VmomYxwD2gX1hubnQKKxUqo8Kvj%2BkVogmZQX4oj%2B_guk7Lw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmomPj6hiKzGMZRYWRNbKC-r-vwz2%2BmfzpBuSB6Hxe4qCsQ@mail.gmail.com> <20131028190005.GA1509@mole.fafoe.narf.at> <CAJ-VmokQsb8eaUnstVmhDHVDoOA%2BJT_iDnOf92RaGEfKwbDsjA@mail.gmail.com> <20131028192731.GA1505@mole.fafoe.narf.at> <CAJ-VmomEQQ=q9P3m2v4AypbZvq%2BaAxnjyupkKBVPqPBMvWEjnQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I've filed a PR. Please update to -HEAD and test. Thanks! -adrian On 28 October 2013 15:05, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: > Hi! > > Yup! So, the difference is in the rate being selected. > > It looks like the remote end is just plainly not ACKing the 11n > management frame being sent; but it totally ACKs the 11b CCK frame > being sent. > > So, thanks for pointing that out. I'll go and err, "fix" this mistake. > The driver should be doing what the stack says. Bernhard figured out a > couple years ago that doing 11n management frames to 11n devices is > not guaranteed to work, so we "fixed" that. I will go and figure out > why this is now broken for iwn. > > Thanks! > > Would you mind filing a PR with what we've gathered? > > > > -adrian > > > > On 28 October 2013 12:27, Stefan Farfeleder <stefanf@freebsd.org> wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 12:07:17PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: >>> Yeah: >>> >>> Oct 28 19:43:43 mole kernel: iwn5000_tx_done: qid 3 idx 4 retries 7 >>> nkill 0 rate a902 duration 686 status 83 >>> >>> status 0x83 is LONG_LIMIT, which meant it tried to transmit and it >>> failed to get an ACK each time. >>> >>> The rate control says: >>> >>> 0x02: the rate in question >>> bit 8: MCS >>> bit 11: HT40 >>> bits 14+15: transmit antennas A+B >>> >>> .. and it's an association/management frame, which is odd as they're >>> not supposed to be sent as 11n HT40 frames like this. >>> >>> can you do the same experiment but with the patch reverted? I'd like >>> to see what the selected rate is. >> >> Ok, here's the output with r257155 and r257133 reverted: >> >> http://pastebin.com/CJzsTANv >> >> Stefan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmo==K73JC-0_nFT0X2sde2=mCbyWCUgEH%2BdiXbEzDgLxzw>