* [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-21 13:17 ` Kalle Valo 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Kalle Valo @ 2016-04-21 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath10k; +Cc: linux-wireless From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> According to the spec, VHT doesn't exist in 2.4GHz. There are vendor extensions to allow a subset of VHT to work (notably 256-QAM), but since mac80211 doesn't support those advertising VHT capability on 2.4GHz leads to the behaviour of reporting VHT capabilities but not being able to use any of them due to mac80211's code requiring 80 MHz support. Remove the VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz for now. If mac80211 gets extended to use the (likely Broadcom) vendor IEs for it and handles the lack of 80 MHz support, it can be added back. Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> --- v2: * Cc ath10k@lists.infradead.org drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c index bcf025f51310..d2a852805b07 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c @@ -4276,9 +4276,6 @@ static void ath10k_mac_setup_ht_vht_cap(struct ath10k *ar) if (ar->phy_capability & WHAL_WLAN_11G_CAPABILITY) { band = &ar->mac.sbands[NL80211_BAND_2GHZ]; band->ht_cap = ht_cap; - - /* Enable the VHT support at 2.4 GHz */ - band->vht_cap = vht_cap; } if (ar->phy_capability & WHAL_WLAN_11A_CAPABILITY) { band = &ar->mac.sbands[NL80211_BAND_5GHZ]; -- 1.7.9.5 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-21 13:17 ` Kalle Valo 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Kalle Valo @ 2016-04-21 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath10k; +Cc: linux-wireless From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> According to the spec, VHT doesn't exist in 2.4GHz. There are vendor extensions to allow a subset of VHT to work (notably 256-QAM), but since mac80211 doesn't support those advertising VHT capability on 2.4GHz leads to the behaviour of reporting VHT capabilities but not being able to use any of them due to mac80211's code requiring 80 MHz support. Remove the VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz for now. If mac80211 gets extended to use the (likely Broadcom) vendor IEs for it and handles the lack of 80 MHz support, it can be added back. Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> --- v2: * Cc ath10k@lists.infradead.org drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c index bcf025f51310..d2a852805b07 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c @@ -4276,9 +4276,6 @@ static void ath10k_mac_setup_ht_vht_cap(struct ath10k *ar) if (ar->phy_capability & WHAL_WLAN_11G_CAPABILITY) { band = &ar->mac.sbands[NL80211_BAND_2GHZ]; band->ht_cap = ht_cap; - - /* Enable the VHT support at 2.4 GHz */ - band->vht_cap = vht_cap; } if (ar->phy_capability & WHAL_WLAN_11A_CAPABILITY) { band = &ar->mac.sbands[NL80211_BAND_5GHZ]; -- 1.7.9.5 _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-21 13:17 ` Kalle Valo @ 2016-04-21 15:15 ` Ben Greear -1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Ben Greear @ 2016-04-21 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kalle Valo, ath10k; +Cc: linux-wireless On 04/21/2016 06:17 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: > From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> > > According to the spec, VHT doesn't exist in 2.4GHz. > > There are vendor extensions to allow a subset of VHT to work > (notably 256-QAM), but since mac80211 doesn't support those > advertising VHT capability on 2.4GHz leads to the behaviour > of reporting VHT capabilities but not being able to use any > of them due to mac80211's code requiring 80 MHz support. > > Remove the VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz for now. If mac80211 > gets extended to use the (likely Broadcom) vendor IEs for it > and handles the lack of 80 MHz support, it can be added back. > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. Have you actually found any case where the existing behaviour causes a real problem? Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-21 15:15 ` Ben Greear 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Ben Greear @ 2016-04-21 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kalle Valo, ath10k; +Cc: linux-wireless On 04/21/2016 06:17 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: > From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> > > According to the spec, VHT doesn't exist in 2.4GHz. > > There are vendor extensions to allow a subset of VHT to work > (notably 256-QAM), but since mac80211 doesn't support those > advertising VHT capability on 2.4GHz leads to the behaviour > of reporting VHT capabilities but not being able to use any > of them due to mac80211's code requiring 80 MHz support. > > Remove the VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz for now. If mac80211 > gets extended to use the (likely Broadcom) vendor IEs for it > and handles the lack of 80 MHz support, it can be added back. > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. Have you actually found any case where the existing behaviour causes a real problem? Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-21 15:15 ` Ben Greear (?) @ 2016-04-21 20:09 ` Sebastian Gottschall 2016-04-21 23:07 ` Michael Ney -1 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Gottschall @ 2016-04-21 20:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath10k Am 21.04.2016 um 17:15 schrieb Ben Greear: > On 04/21/2016 06:17 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> >> >> According to the spec, VHT doesn't exist in 2.4GHz. >> >> There are vendor extensions to allow a subset of VHT to work >> (notably 256-QAM), but since mac80211 doesn't support those >> advertising VHT capability on 2.4GHz leads to the behaviour >> of reporting VHT capabilities but not being able to use any >> of them due to mac80211's code requiring 80 MHz support. >> >> Remove the VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz for now. If mac80211 >> gets extended to use the (likely Broadcom) vendor IEs for it >> and handles the lack of 80 MHz support, it can be added back. >> >> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> >> Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> > > The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted > to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't > applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. > > Have you actually found any case where the existing behaviour causes > a real problem? i agree. other vendor chipsets to support QAM256 as well in 2.4 ghz (notably broadcom) this is nonstandard, but since all going the same way it wouldnt be a great idea to keep QCA out of that extensions. > > Thanks, > Ben > _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-21 20:09 ` Sebastian Gottschall @ 2016-04-21 23:07 ` Michael Ney 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Michael Ney @ 2016-04-21 23:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sebastian Gottschall; +Cc: ath10k Also, several vendors are advertising QCA9980 and QCA9984 based access points with 256QAM support in 2.4GHz, such as the TP-Link AD7200 and the Netgear R7800, both of which advertise 800mbps 4-stream 2.4GHz capabilities. > On Apr 21, 2016, at 4:09 PM, Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@dd-wrt.com> wrote: > > Am 21.04.2016 um 17:15 schrieb Ben Greear: >> On 04/21/2016 06:17 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>> From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> >>> >>> According to the spec, VHT doesn't exist in 2.4GHz. >>> >>> There are vendor extensions to allow a subset of VHT to work >>> (notably 256-QAM), but since mac80211 doesn't support those >>> advertising VHT capability on 2.4GHz leads to the behaviour >>> of reporting VHT capabilities but not being able to use any >>> of them due to mac80211's code requiring 80 MHz support. >>> >>> Remove the VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz for now. If mac80211 >>> gets extended to use the (likely Broadcom) vendor IEs for it >>> and handles the lack of 80 MHz support, it can be added back. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> >> >> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted >> to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't >> applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. >> >> Have you actually found any case where the existing behaviour causes >> a real problem? > i agree. other vendor chipsets to support QAM256 as well in 2.4 ghz (notably broadcom) > this is nonstandard, but since all going the same way it wouldnt be a great idea to keep QCA out of that extensions. >> >> Thanks, >> Ben >> > > > _______________________________________________ > ath10k mailing list > ath10k@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-21 15:15 ` Ben Greear @ 2016-04-26 7:04 ` Johannes Berg -1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Johannes Berg @ 2016-04-26 7:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Greear, Kalle Valo, ath10k; +Cc: linux-wireless On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:15 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted > to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't > applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. This patch has no implications on HT, and I wasn't planning on applying the mac80211 patch. As I said, I have no objections to doing the (Broadcom) vendor specific IEs for "VHT" in 2.4 GHz band, but I don't think we should advertise the spec IEs when they're explicitly specified to be used only in the 5.2 GHz band. johannes ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-26 7:04 ` Johannes Berg 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Johannes Berg @ 2016-04-26 7:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Greear, Kalle Valo, ath10k; +Cc: linux-wireless On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:15 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted > to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't > applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. This patch has no implications on HT, and I wasn't planning on applying the mac80211 patch. As I said, I have no objections to doing the (Broadcom) vendor specific IEs for "VHT" in 2.4 GHz band, but I don't think we should advertise the spec IEs when they're explicitly specified to be used only in the 5.2 GHz band. johannes _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-26 7:04 ` Johannes Berg @ 2016-04-26 12:03 ` Valo, Kalle -1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Valo, Kalle @ 2016-04-26 12:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Johannes Berg; +Cc: Ben Greear, ath10k, linux-wireless Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes: > On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:15 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > >> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted >> to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't >> applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. > > This patch has no implications on HT, and I wasn't planning on applying > the mac80211 patch. Yeah, makes sense. I'm planning to apply this soon. > As I said, I have no objections to doing the (Broadcom) vendor specific > IEs for "VHT" in 2.4 GHz band, but I don't think we should advertise > the spec IEs when they're explicitly specified to be used only in the > 5.2 GHz band. But we really should have this, any volunteers? :) I think it shouldn't be too hard to do so this would be a good project for someone looking for a simple, but useful, task on wireless stack. -- Kalle Valo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-26 12:03 ` Valo, Kalle 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Valo, Kalle @ 2016-04-26 12:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Johannes Berg; +Cc: Ben Greear, linux-wireless, ath10k Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes: > On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:15 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > >> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted >> to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't >> applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. > > This patch has no implications on HT, and I wasn't planning on applying > the mac80211 patch. Yeah, makes sense. I'm planning to apply this soon. > As I said, I have no objections to doing the (Broadcom) vendor specific > IEs for "VHT" in 2.4 GHz band, but I don't think we should advertise > the spec IEs when they're explicitly specified to be used only in the > 5.2 GHz band. But we really should have this, any volunteers? :) I think it shouldn't be too hard to do so this would be a good project for someone looking for a simple, but useful, task on wireless stack. -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-26 12:03 ` Valo, Kalle @ 2016-04-26 20:07 ` Krishna Chaitanya -1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Krishna Chaitanya @ 2016-04-26 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Valo, Kalle; +Cc: Johannes Berg, Ben Greear, ath10k, linux-wireless On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Valo, Kalle <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> wrote: > Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes: > >> On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:15 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >> >>> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted >>> to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't >>> applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. >> >> This patch has no implications on HT, and I wasn't planning on applying >> the mac80211 patch. > > Yeah, makes sense. I'm planning to apply this soon. > >> As I said, I have no objections to doing the (Broadcom) vendor specific >> IEs for "VHT" in 2.4 GHz band, but I don't think we should advertise >> the spec IEs when they're explicitly specified to be used only in the >> 5.2 GHz band. > > But we really should have this, any volunteers? :) I think it shouldn't > be too hard to do so this would be a good project for someone looking > for a simple, but useful, task on wireless stack. Are these Broadcom IEs documented somewhere? If yes, then its a matter of parsing them and adding support to minstrel_ht, isn't it? major work would be in minstrel. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-26 20:07 ` Krishna Chaitanya 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Krishna Chaitanya @ 2016-04-26 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Valo, Kalle; +Cc: Johannes Berg, linux-wireless, Ben Greear, ath10k On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Valo, Kalle <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> wrote: > Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes: > >> On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:15 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >> >>> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted >>> to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't >>> applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. >> >> This patch has no implications on HT, and I wasn't planning on applying >> the mac80211 patch. > > Yeah, makes sense. I'm planning to apply this soon. > >> As I said, I have no objections to doing the (Broadcom) vendor specific >> IEs for "VHT" in 2.4 GHz band, but I don't think we should advertise >> the spec IEs when they're explicitly specified to be used only in the >> 5.2 GHz band. > > But we really should have this, any volunteers? :) I think it shouldn't > be too hard to do so this would be a good project for someone looking > for a simple, but useful, task on wireless stack. Are these Broadcom IEs documented somewhere? If yes, then its a matter of parsing them and adding support to minstrel_ht, isn't it? major work would be in minstrel. _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-26 20:07 ` Krishna Chaitanya @ 2016-04-26 20:10 ` Ben Greear -1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Ben Greear @ 2016-04-26 20:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krishna Chaitanya, Valo, Kalle; +Cc: Johannes Berg, ath10k, linux-wireless On 04/26/2016 01:07 PM, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Valo, Kalle <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> wrote: >> Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes: >> >>> On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:15 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >>> >>>> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted >>>> to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't >>>> applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. >>> >>> This patch has no implications on HT, and I wasn't planning on applying >>> the mac80211 patch. >> >> Yeah, makes sense. I'm planning to apply this soon. >> >>> As I said, I have no objections to doing the (Broadcom) vendor specific >>> IEs for "VHT" in 2.4 GHz band, but I don't think we should advertise >>> the spec IEs when they're explicitly specified to be used only in the >>> 5.2 GHz band. >> >> But we really should have this, any volunteers? :) I think it shouldn't >> be too hard to do so this would be a good project for someone looking >> for a simple, but useful, task on wireless stack. > Are these Broadcom IEs documented somewhere? If yes, > then its a matter of parsing them and adding support to > minstrel_ht, isn't it? major work would be in minstrel. > For ath10k, rate-ctrl is done in the firmware, so no work at all in minstrel-ht. The end result, as far as I can tell, is you would just have to tell mac80211 to allow VHT on 2.4Ghz, and revert this patch that Kalle is proposing. Maybe someone that actually knows about these IEs can explain why they are worth using? Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-26 20:10 ` Ben Greear 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Ben Greear @ 2016-04-26 20:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krishna Chaitanya, Valo, Kalle; +Cc: Johannes Berg, linux-wireless, ath10k On 04/26/2016 01:07 PM, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Valo, Kalle <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> wrote: >> Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes: >> >>> On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:15 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >>> >>>> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted >>>> to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't >>>> applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. >>> >>> This patch has no implications on HT, and I wasn't planning on applying >>> the mac80211 patch. >> >> Yeah, makes sense. I'm planning to apply this soon. >> >>> As I said, I have no objections to doing the (Broadcom) vendor specific >>> IEs for "VHT" in 2.4 GHz band, but I don't think we should advertise >>> the spec IEs when they're explicitly specified to be used only in the >>> 5.2 GHz band. >> >> But we really should have this, any volunteers? :) I think it shouldn't >> be too hard to do so this would be a good project for someone looking >> for a simple, but useful, task on wireless stack. > Are these Broadcom IEs documented somewhere? If yes, > then its a matter of parsing them and adding support to > minstrel_ht, isn't it? major work would be in minstrel. > For ath10k, rate-ctrl is done in the firmware, so no work at all in minstrel-ht. The end result, as far as I can tell, is you would just have to tell mac80211 to allow VHT on 2.4Ghz, and revert this patch that Kalle is proposing. Maybe someone that actually knows about these IEs can explain why they are worth using? Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-26 20:10 ` Ben Greear @ 2016-04-27 6:43 ` Krishna Chaitanya -1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Krishna Chaitanya @ 2016-04-27 6:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Greear; +Cc: Valo, Kalle, Johannes Berg, ath10k, linux-wireless On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote: > On 04/26/2016 01:07 PM, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: >> >> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Valo, Kalle <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes: >>> >>>> On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:15 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >>>> >>>>> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted >>>>> to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't >>>>> applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. >>>> >>>> >>>> This patch has no implications on HT, and I wasn't planning on applying >>>> the mac80211 patch. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, makes sense. I'm planning to apply this soon. >>> >>>> As I said, I have no objections to doing the (Broadcom) vendor specific >>>> IEs for "VHT" in 2.4 GHz band, but I don't think we should advertise >>>> the spec IEs when they're explicitly specified to be used only in the >>>> 5.2 GHz band. >>> >>> >>> But we really should have this, any volunteers? :) I think it shouldn't >>> be too hard to do so this would be a good project for someone looking >>> for a simple, but useful, task on wireless stack. >> >> Are these Broadcom IEs documented somewhere? If yes, >> then its a matter of parsing them and adding support to >> minstrel_ht, isn't it? major work would be in minstrel. >> > > For ath10k, rate-ctrl is done in the firmware, so > no work at all in minstrel-ht. Right, i think this might become more common. So may we need to change minstrel_ht as well? > The end result, as far as I can tell, > is you would just have to tell mac80211 to allow > VHT on 2.4Ghz, and revert this patch that Kalle is proposing. Ideally as this is vendor specific it makes sense to implement this at Driver/FW level rather than implementing it at a common stack like mac80211. > Maybe someone that actually knows about these IEs can explain why > they are worth using? These IE's can be parsed in the driver without any mac80211 involvement. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-27 6:43 ` Krishna Chaitanya 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Krishna Chaitanya @ 2016-04-27 6:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Greear; +Cc: Valo, Kalle, linux-wireless, Johannes Berg, ath10k On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote: > On 04/26/2016 01:07 PM, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: >> >> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Valo, Kalle <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes: >>> >>>> On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:15 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >>>> >>>>> The thing is, it actually works just fine with the patch I posted >>>>> to fix mac80211, and at any rate, even if the mac80211 patch isn't >>>>> applied, the ath10k driver works just fine in HT mode. >>>> >>>> >>>> This patch has no implications on HT, and I wasn't planning on applying >>>> the mac80211 patch. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, makes sense. I'm planning to apply this soon. >>> >>>> As I said, I have no objections to doing the (Broadcom) vendor specific >>>> IEs for "VHT" in 2.4 GHz band, but I don't think we should advertise >>>> the spec IEs when they're explicitly specified to be used only in the >>>> 5.2 GHz band. >>> >>> >>> But we really should have this, any volunteers? :) I think it shouldn't >>> be too hard to do so this would be a good project for someone looking >>> for a simple, but useful, task on wireless stack. >> >> Are these Broadcom IEs documented somewhere? If yes, >> then its a matter of parsing them and adding support to >> minstrel_ht, isn't it? major work would be in minstrel. >> > > For ath10k, rate-ctrl is done in the firmware, so > no work at all in minstrel-ht. Right, i think this might become more common. So may we need to change minstrel_ht as well? > The end result, as far as I can tell, > is you would just have to tell mac80211 to allow > VHT on 2.4Ghz, and revert this patch that Kalle is proposing. Ideally as this is vendor specific it makes sense to implement this at Driver/FW level rather than implementing it at a common stack like mac80211. > Maybe someone that actually knows about these IEs can explain why > they are worth using? These IE's can be parsed in the driver without any mac80211 involvement. _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-27 6:43 ` Krishna Chaitanya @ 2016-04-27 9:16 ` Jouni Malinen -1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Jouni Malinen @ 2016-04-27 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krishna Chaitanya Cc: Ben Greear, Valo, Kalle, Johannes Berg, ath10k, linux-wireless On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:13:46PM +0530, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote: > > On 04/26/2016 01:07 PM, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: > >> Are these Broadcom IEs documented somewhere? If yes, > >> then its a matter of parsing them and adding support to > >> minstrel_ht, isn't it? major work would be in minstrel. > > The end result, as far as I can tell, > > is you would just have to tell mac80211 to allow > > VHT on 2.4Ghz, and revert this patch that Kalle is proposing. > > Ideally as this is vendor specific it makes sense to implement this > at Driver/FW level rather than implementing it at a common stack > like mac80211. > > > Maybe someone that actually knows about these IEs can explain why > > they are worth using? > > These IE's can be parsed in the driver without any mac80211 involvement. Sure, these are vendor specific elements, but they are simply encapsulating the standard VHT elements that we already handle within mac80211 for STA functionality and hostapd for AP functionality. I don't see why we would make this any more complex for 2.4 GHz 256-QAM support than extending the existing locations that support the VHT elements. The main reason for me in using these particular vendor specific elements is in them being already supported by number of deployed devices. There is also support for these in hostapd (vendor_vht=1 in hostapd.conf) and as far as I know, this used to work with ath10k for AP mode (and this patch we discuss here may break that). The main missing functionality is for the matching STA side support with mac80211 and that's where the changes, IMHO, would fit in nicely in mac80211 next to the places where we handle the matching standard VHT elements in the 5 GHz band. -- Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-27 9:16 ` Jouni Malinen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Jouni Malinen @ 2016-04-27 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krishna Chaitanya Cc: Johannes Berg, Ben Greear, linux-wireless, Valo, Kalle, ath10k On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:13:46PM +0530, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote: > > On 04/26/2016 01:07 PM, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: > >> Are these Broadcom IEs documented somewhere? If yes, > >> then its a matter of parsing them and adding support to > >> minstrel_ht, isn't it? major work would be in minstrel. > > The end result, as far as I can tell, > > is you would just have to tell mac80211 to allow > > VHT on 2.4Ghz, and revert this patch that Kalle is proposing. > > Ideally as this is vendor specific it makes sense to implement this > at Driver/FW level rather than implementing it at a common stack > like mac80211. > > > Maybe someone that actually knows about these IEs can explain why > > they are worth using? > > These IE's can be parsed in the driver without any mac80211 involvement. Sure, these are vendor specific elements, but they are simply encapsulating the standard VHT elements that we already handle within mac80211 for STA functionality and hostapd for AP functionality. I don't see why we would make this any more complex for 2.4 GHz 256-QAM support than extending the existing locations that support the VHT elements. The main reason for me in using these particular vendor specific elements is in them being already supported by number of deployed devices. There is also support for these in hostapd (vendor_vht=1 in hostapd.conf) and as far as I know, this used to work with ath10k for AP mode (and this patch we discuss here may break that). The main missing functionality is for the matching STA side support with mac80211 and that's where the changes, IMHO, would fit in nicely in mac80211 next to the places where we handle the matching standard VHT elements in the 5 GHz band. -- Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-27 9:16 ` Jouni Malinen @ 2016-04-27 9:37 ` Krishna Chaitanya -1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Krishna Chaitanya @ 2016-04-27 9:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jouni Malinen Cc: Ben Greear, Valo, Kalle, Johannes Berg, ath10k, linux-wireless On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:13:46PM +0530, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote: >> > On 04/26/2016 01:07 PM, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: >> >> Are these Broadcom IEs documented somewhere? If yes, >> >> then its a matter of parsing them and adding support to >> >> minstrel_ht, isn't it? major work would be in minstrel. > >> > The end result, as far as I can tell, >> > is you would just have to tell mac80211 to allow >> > VHT on 2.4Ghz, and revert this patch that Kalle is proposing. >> >> Ideally as this is vendor specific it makes sense to implement this >> at Driver/FW level rather than implementing it at a common stack >> like mac80211. >> >> > Maybe someone that actually knows about these IEs can explain why >> > they are worth using? >> >> These IE's can be parsed in the driver without any mac80211 involvement. > > Sure, these are vendor specific elements, but they are simply > encapsulating the standard VHT elements that we already handle within > mac80211 for STA functionality and hostapd for AP functionality. I don't > see why we would make this any more complex for 2.4 GHz 256-QAM support > than extending the existing locations that support the VHT elements. > > The main reason for me in using these particular vendor specific > elements is in them being already supported by number of deployed > devices. There is also support for these in hostapd (vendor_vht=1 in > hostapd.conf) and as far as I know, this used to work with ath10k for AP > mode (and this patch we discuss here may break that). The main missing > functionality is for the matching STA side support with mac80211 and > that's where the changes, IMHO, would fit in nicely in mac80211 next to > the places where we handle the matching standard VHT elements in the 5 > GHz band. If many vendors need this support, then mac80211 appraoch would be good. If not, we should stick to driver approach. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-27 9:37 ` Krishna Chaitanya 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Krishna Chaitanya @ 2016-04-27 9:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jouni Malinen Cc: Johannes Berg, Ben Greear, linux-wireless, Valo, Kalle, ath10k On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:13:46PM +0530, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote: >> > On 04/26/2016 01:07 PM, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: >> >> Are these Broadcom IEs documented somewhere? If yes, >> >> then its a matter of parsing them and adding support to >> >> minstrel_ht, isn't it? major work would be in minstrel. > >> > The end result, as far as I can tell, >> > is you would just have to tell mac80211 to allow >> > VHT on 2.4Ghz, and revert this patch that Kalle is proposing. >> >> Ideally as this is vendor specific it makes sense to implement this >> at Driver/FW level rather than implementing it at a common stack >> like mac80211. >> >> > Maybe someone that actually knows about these IEs can explain why >> > they are worth using? >> >> These IE's can be parsed in the driver without any mac80211 involvement. > > Sure, these are vendor specific elements, but they are simply > encapsulating the standard VHT elements that we already handle within > mac80211 for STA functionality and hostapd for AP functionality. I don't > see why we would make this any more complex for 2.4 GHz 256-QAM support > than extending the existing locations that support the VHT elements. > > The main reason for me in using these particular vendor specific > elements is in them being already supported by number of deployed > devices. There is also support for these in hostapd (vendor_vht=1 in > hostapd.conf) and as far as I know, this used to work with ath10k for AP > mode (and this patch we discuss here may break that). The main missing > functionality is for the matching STA side support with mac80211 and > that's where the changes, IMHO, would fit in nicely in mac80211 next to > the places where we handle the matching standard VHT elements in the 5 > GHz band. If many vendors need this support, then mac80211 appraoch would be good. If not, we should stick to driver approach. _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-27 9:37 ` Krishna Chaitanya @ 2016-04-27 9:45 ` Johannes Berg -1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Johannes Berg @ 2016-04-27 9:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krishna Chaitanya, Jouni Malinen Cc: Ben Greear, Valo, Kalle, ath10k, linux-wireless On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 15:07 +0530, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: > > If many vendors need this support, then mac80211 appraoch would be > good. If not, we should stick to driver approach. Trying to do this in the driver gets practically impossible, so no, it really should be done in mac80211 either way. Drivers have to opt in by reporting VHT caps for 2.4 GHz, at which point we simply revert this patch, but get the right over-the-air behaviour. johannes ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-04-27 9:45 ` Johannes Berg 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Johannes Berg @ 2016-04-27 9:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krishna Chaitanya, Jouni Malinen Cc: Ben Greear, linux-wireless, Valo, Kalle, ath10k On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 15:07 +0530, Krishna Chaitanya wrote: > > If many vendors need this support, then mac80211 appraoch would be > good. If not, we should stick to driver approach. Trying to do this in the driver gets practically impossible, so no, it really should be done in mac80211 either way. Drivers have to opt in by reporting VHT caps for 2.4 GHz, at which point we simply revert this patch, but get the right over-the-air behaviour. johannes _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz 2016-04-21 13:17 ` Kalle Valo @ 2016-05-06 18:08 ` Valo, Kalle -1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Valo, Kalle @ 2016-05-06 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath10k; +Cc: linux-wireless Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> writes: > From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> > > According to the spec, VHT doesn't exist in 2.4GHz. > > There are vendor extensions to allow a subset of VHT to work > (notably 256-QAM), but since mac80211 doesn't support those > advertising VHT capability on 2.4GHz leads to the behaviour > of reporting VHT capabilities but not being able to use any > of them due to mac80211's code requiring 80 MHz support. > > Remove the VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz for now. If mac80211 > gets extended to use the (likely Broadcom) vendor IEs for it > and handles the lack of 80 MHz support, it can be added back. > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> Applied, thanks. -- Kalle Valo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz @ 2016-05-06 18:08 ` Valo, Kalle 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Valo, Kalle @ 2016-05-06 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ath10k; +Cc: linux-wireless Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> writes: > From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> > > According to the spec, VHT doesn't exist in 2.4GHz. > > There are vendor extensions to allow a subset of VHT to work > (notably 256-QAM), but since mac80211 doesn't support those > advertising VHT capability on 2.4GHz leads to the behaviour > of reporting VHT capabilities but not being able to use any > of them due to mac80211's code requiring 80 MHz support. > > Remove the VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz for now. If mac80211 > gets extended to use the (likely Broadcom) vendor IEs for it > and handles the lack of 80 MHz support, it can be added back. > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> Applied, thanks. -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-05-06 18:09 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2016-04-21 13:17 [PATCH v2] ath10k: remove VHT capabilities from 2.4GHz Kalle Valo 2016-04-21 13:17 ` Kalle Valo 2016-04-21 15:15 ` Ben Greear 2016-04-21 15:15 ` Ben Greear 2016-04-21 20:09 ` Sebastian Gottschall 2016-04-21 23:07 ` Michael Ney 2016-04-26 7:04 ` Johannes Berg 2016-04-26 7:04 ` Johannes Berg 2016-04-26 12:03 ` Valo, Kalle 2016-04-26 12:03 ` Valo, Kalle 2016-04-26 20:07 ` Krishna Chaitanya 2016-04-26 20:07 ` Krishna Chaitanya 2016-04-26 20:10 ` Ben Greear 2016-04-26 20:10 ` Ben Greear 2016-04-27 6:43 ` Krishna Chaitanya 2016-04-27 6:43 ` Krishna Chaitanya 2016-04-27 9:16 ` Jouni Malinen 2016-04-27 9:16 ` Jouni Malinen 2016-04-27 9:37 ` Krishna Chaitanya 2016-04-27 9:37 ` Krishna Chaitanya 2016-04-27 9:45 ` Johannes Berg 2016-04-27 9:45 ` Johannes Berg 2016-05-06 18:08 ` Valo, Kalle 2016-05-06 18:08 ` Valo, Kalle
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.