From: Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>
To: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Cc: reinette chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 000/002] Fix frequent reconnects caused by new conection monitor
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 23:05:39 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1249070739.25620.11.camel@maxim-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1249068449.23662.17.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 12:27 -0700, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Maxim,
>
> > > > Hi, here is the updated version of these two patches that fix the
> > > > $SUBJECT issue.
> > > >
> > > > I attach these (in case mailer mangles them), and reply with patches.
> > > >
> > > > Tested both with low quality signal, and beacon loss.
> > > > Lack of TX is found, every 30 seconds now, and quite reliable.
> > > > Lack of beacons, triggers probe like it did every 2 seconds.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > I've been running with this for two hours now with no disconnects. This
> > > is where before the patches I would get disconnected after a few
> > > minutes. I did get two "No probe response from AP xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
> > > after 500ms, try 1" messages in my log.
> > This is normal, or at least can be normal, I patched the driver to
> > display this message, when there is a probe timeout, but instead of
> > disconnect, it retries, currently 5 times, but this can be even further
> > increased is necessarily.
> > (these messages are only in logs when verbose mac debugging is enabled)
> >
> > I don't know exactly why probes aren't answered, but I strongly suspect
> > that my AP sometimes 'goes out to lunch' and then answers, since
> > typically after a failed probe it sends many replies.
> > (Or it could be some buffering done by iwl3945 microcode). I currently
> > can't monitor the connection from outside, but as soon as I can I see
> > whether the above is true. Nevertheless if signal quality isn't great,
> > there are valid reasons for probe loss, and it shouldn't cause all the
> > fuzz (and since I use WPA2, every reconnection causes whole WPA
> > handshake to be preformed, and this takes at least 2 seconds, and if a
> > reconnection happens each 5 seconds, it gets very very annoying, and
> > almost unusable.
>
> I am testing your patches and so far so good. Seems to be working
> perfectly fine. I see this in the logs:
>
> [41027.333419] wlan0: detected beacon loss from AP - sending probe request
> [41027.389260] wlan0: cancelling probereq poll due to a received beacon
> [41027.793518] No probe response from AP 00:1c:f0:62:88:5b after 500ms, try 1
> [41028.292731] No probe response from AP 00:1c:f0:62:88:5b after 500ms, try 2
>
> Need to watch out if this pattern emerges and if the beacon loss trigger
> might give us an indication. Maybe the ucode is just not ready then.
Here (on my system) I see no beacon losses at all, like I said there
could be many reasons behind packet losses, and best way to mitigate
them is to retry.
Your logs indicate that beacons weren't recieved for 2 seconds, then
mac80211 tried to send a probe, but a beacon is recieved before the
probe answer, this probe is canceled (at least should be) then after a
while, a probe request (same one?) is time outed, and retried twice,
then finally answered.
Best regards,
Maxim Levitsky
>
> Regards
>
> Marcel
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-31 20:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-31 16:13 [PATCH 000/002] Fix frequent reconnects caused by new conection monitor Maxim Levitsky
2009-07-31 16:14 ` [PATCH 001/002] [MAC80211] Retry probe request few times Maxim Levitsky
2009-07-31 16:21 ` Johannes Berg
2009-08-05 2:22 ` Marcel Holtmann
2009-08-05 5:29 ` Maxim Levitsky
2009-08-05 5:33 ` Johannes Berg
2009-08-05 5:50 ` Gábor Stefanik
2009-08-05 5:51 ` Johannes Berg
2009-08-05 5:53 ` Gábor Stefanik
2009-08-05 5:58 ` Johannes Berg
2009-08-05 15:45 ` Marcel Holtmann
2009-07-31 16:17 ` [PATCH 002/002] [MAC80211] Increase timeouts for station polling Maxim Levitsky
2009-07-31 16:21 ` Johannes Berg
2009-07-31 18:52 ` [PATCH 000/002] Fix frequent reconnects caused by new conection monitor reinette chatre
2009-07-31 19:08 ` Maxim Levitsky
2009-07-31 19:27 ` Marcel Holtmann
2009-07-31 20:05 ` Maxim Levitsky [this message]
2009-08-01 15:25 ` Marcel Holtmann
2009-08-03 22:33 ` Maxim Levitsky
2009-08-03 23:58 ` Marcel Holtmann
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=1249070739.25620.11.camel@maxim-laptop \
--to=maximlevitsky@gmail.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).