Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:52:25 +0200 | From | "Arend van Spriel" <> | Subject | Re: Problems with regulatory domain support and BCM43224 |
| |
On 04/11/2012 03:39 PM, Seth Forshee wrote: > 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. >
That is the one.
>>>>> 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. >
No answer on this one yet, but keep you posted.
Gr. AvS
| |