From: Xuebing Wang <xbing6@gmail.com>
To: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>,
Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com>,
marcus Wright <mwright@sharetracker.net>,
"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: ath10k: qca6174 firmware: difference between hw2.1/firmware-5 and hw3.0/firmware-4
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 17:57:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57BD6FA7.4040003@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57BD64CE.7060106@gmail.com>
Hi Michal, Stanislaw and community,
Are you aware of any WLAN card with qca6174 hw3.2 chip (BMI version
signatures = 0x05030000 = QCA6174_HW_3_2_VERSION), so I can buy one to
test on Linux PC with upstream kernel, to ensure hw3.0 firmware (not
hw2.1 firmware) (hopefully without Rx offloading) works with Monitor Mode?
Thanks.
xuebing
On 08/24/2016 05:11 PM, Xuebing Wang wrote:
> Hi Michal, thanks.
>
>
> Hi Kalle,
>
> Is there a version of hw3.0 firmware (without Rx offloading) for me to
> give a try of Monitor Mode on qca6174 hw3.2 chip? Thanks.
>
> xuebing
>
> On 08/24/2016 02:13 PM, Michal Kazior wrote:
>> On 24 August 2016 at 05:57, Xuebing Wang <xbing6@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Kalle,
>>>
>>> I cloned your ath10k-firmware from your github. Would you please
>>> advise what
>>> are the differences of hw2.1/firmware-5 and hw3.0/firmware-4 for
>>> qca6174?
>>> Does hw3.0/firmware-4 support Monitor Mode?
>>>
>>> I have a wlan card with BMI version (QCA6174_HW_2_1_VERSION
>>> 0x05010000) and
>>> Monitor Mode works no problem with latest kernel v4.8-rc2.
>>>
>>> I have another wlan card with (QCA6174_HW_3_2_VERSION 0x05030000). I am
>>> trying to back-port ath10k from v4.8-rc2 to 3.10.73 for this HW_3_2
>>> QCA6174
>>> wlan card. Virtual interface (mon0) can be added and brought-up, but
>>> tcpdump
>>> can not capture any packets. I am wondering if it could be related to
>>> (hw2.1/firmware-5 vs hw3.0/firmware-4)?
>> Official hw3.x's firmware supports full rx offload. Rx event used to
>> deliver frames is very specialized effectively preventing sniffing /
>> monitor operation.
>>
>> I don't know if there's any way around it without getting your hands
>> on firmware build that doesn't have the full rx offload compiled in
>> (assuming such a build even exists).
>>
>>
>> Michał
>>
>
--
Xuebing
_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-24 9:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-24 3:57 ath10k: qca6174 firmware: difference between hw2.1/firmware-5 and hw3.0/firmware-4 Xuebing Wang
2016-08-24 6:13 ` Michal Kazior
2016-08-24 9:11 ` Xuebing Wang
2016-08-24 9:57 ` Xuebing Wang [this message]
2016-08-30 8:03 ` Valo, Kalle
2016-09-05 2:56 ` Xuebing Wang
2016-09-07 23:25 ` Xuebing Wang
2016-09-08 5:13 ` Valo, Kalle
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=57BD6FA7.4040003@gmail.com \
--to=xbing6@gmail.com \
--cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com \
--cc=michal.kazior@tieto.com \
--cc=mwright@sharetracker.net \
--cc=sgruszka@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.