lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Problems with regulatory domain support and BCM43224
    On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 12:16:40PM +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote:
    > On 04/10/2012 06:28 PM, Seth Forshee wrote:
    > >>The patch builds, and kind of works. Scanning seems to be fine; I can
    > >>> see all the APs I expect in my area, including the one on a DFS channel
    > >>> that I couldn't see previously. I can associate with my 2.4 GHz APs, but
    > >>> not the 5 GHz AP. I see timme outs waiting for probe responses, and I'm
    > >>> hitting the WARN_ON_ONCE in brcms_c_wait_for_tx_completion(). I haven't
    > >>> really debugged this yet -- I thought I'd send out the patch to collect
    > >>> comments while I debug. Suggestions of what's causing this are also
    > >>> welcome:)
    > >This was due to always passing true for the value of mute_tx to
    > >brcms_b_set_chanspec() on passive channels. For now I'm just always
    > >passing false, which looks like it ought to be okay as we shouldn't have
    > >any tx on passive channels unless beacons are seen on the channel.
    >
    > Yes. I discovered this as well. Actually, I sent out a patch for
    > some people to test it. I submitted a slightly different patch to
    > John in which tx in unmuted upon receiving a beacon.

    I assume you're talking about this patch?

    http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-wireless/msg88107.html

    My original changes would mute tx whenever IEEE80211_CHAN_PASSIVE_SCAN
    is set for the current channel. I'll try that again with your patch.

    > >>> One of the major unresolved issues in the patch is what to do with the
    > >>> data in struct locale_mimo_info. The regulatory rules only hold one
    > >>> power level. I'm unsure why the brcmsmac implementation differs in this
    > >>> regard. Suggestions?
    > >This is still one of the largest unsolved issues. I'm probably going to
    > >need some advice on how to fill out the txpwr information when
    > >regualtory rules external to the driver can be applied.
    > >
    >
    > The power constraints for HT (covered by struct locale_mimo_info)
    > are handled differently from non-HT. I have to confirm internally
    > whether this is specific for our devices or actually needed to be
    > compliant.

    Great, thanks.

    Seth



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-04-11 15:43    [W:0.044 / U:30.312 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site