linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tony Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com>
To: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Cc: "kvalo@codeaurora.org" <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
	"Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net" <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
	Andy Huang <tehuang@realtek.com>,
	"sgruszka@redhat.com" <sgruszka@redhat.com>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 01/24] rtw88: report correct tx status if mac80211 requested one
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 04:31:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <F7CD281DE3E379468C6D07993EA72F84D17A2A22@RTITMBSVM04.realtek.com.tw> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190209030756.GB163159@google.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Norris [mailto:briannorris@chromium.org]
> 
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 08:21:14PM +0800, yhchuang@realtek.com wrote:
> > From: Yan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com>
> >
> > Before this commit, driver always reports IEEE80211_TX_STAT_ACK for
> > every tx packet, but it will confuse the mac80211 stack for connection
> > monitor system. mac80211 stack needs correct ack information about some
> > specific packets such as prop_req, null, auth, assoc, in order to know
> > if AP is alive. And for such packets, mac80211 will pass a tx flag
> > IEEE80211_TX_CTL_REQ_TX_STATUS to driver. Driver then need to request a
> > tx report from hardware.
> 
> I think you're misinterpreting the mac80211 semantics here. This flag
> isn't for the driver to determine whether or not it should report ACKs
> -- it's to help ensure that status reports *really* make it back up to
> the upper layers (and don't get dropped).
> 
> On the contrary, if you look at __ieee80211_tx_status(), it's expecting
> that everything that has IEEE80211_HW_REPORTS_TX_ACK_STATUS will report
> an appropriate IEEE80211_TX_STAT_ACK status. The logic is basically:
> 
> 	if (ieee80211_hw_check(&local->hw, REPORTS_TX_ACK_STATUS))
> 		if (!(info->flags & IEEE80211_TX_STAT_ACK))
> 			ieee80211_lost_packet(sta, info);
> 
> That explains why I see almost every packet get reported as lost in `iw
> wlan0 station dump`.

To fix `iw wlan0 station dump` display, I think I can just restore one line
in pci.c. That is, restore IEEE80211_TX_STAT_ACK flag line:

+			continue;
+		}
  		ieee80211_tx_info_clear_status(info);
-		info->flags |= IEEE80211_TX_STAT_ACK;
  		ieee80211_tx_status_irqsafe(hw, skb)

And with some modifications, such as IEEE80211_TX_CTL_NO_ACK check.
Then we can better reporting ACK status for data frames without
IEEE80211_TX_CTL_REQ_TX_STATUS. This way we can also ensure the
connection monitor can work. (but it will be no loss)


> 
> > The tx report is not passed by hardware with the tx'ed packet, it is
> > passed through C2H. So driver need to queue the packets that require
> > correct tx report and upon the tx report is received, report to mac80211
> > stack, with the frame is acked or not.
> >
> > In case of driver missed the C2H report, setup a 500ms timer to purge
> > the tx report skb queue (500ms is time mac80211 used as probe_time).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c   | 21 ++++++-
> >  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.h   |  8 +++
> >  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c | 10 ++++
> >  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.h | 13 +++++
> >  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c  |  8 ++-
> >  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.h  |  1 +
> >  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/tx.c   | 96
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/tx.h   |  8 +++
> >  8 files changed, 163 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> ...
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c
> > index ef3c9bb..7de4638 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c
> > @@ -585,6 +585,7 @@ static int rtw_pci_xmit(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,
> >
> >  	tx_data = rtw_pci_get_tx_data(skb);
> >  	tx_data->dma = dma;
> > +	tx_data->sn = pkt_info->sn;
> >  	skb_queue_tail(&ring->queue, skb);
> >
> >  	/* kick off tx queue */
> > @@ -716,8 +717,13 @@ static void rtw_pci_tx_isr(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,
> struct rtw_pci *rtwpci,
> >  		skb_pull(skb, rtwdev->chip->tx_pkt_desc_sz);
> >
> >  		info = IEEE80211_SKB_CB(skb);
> > +
> > +		/* enqueue to wait for tx report */
> > +		if (info->flags & IEEE80211_TX_CTL_REQ_TX_STATUS) {
> > +			rtw_tx_report_enqueue(rtwdev, skb, tx_data->sn);
> 
> This reporting code appears to be very buggy. At least, it's extremely
> easy to hit the WARN() you've inserted ("purge skb(s) not reported by
> firmware"), which means that the TX reporting queue is not getting
> responses for a lot of packets.

It's not buggy I think, if firmware is not reporting status, something must
go wrong. And after some test I know why you feel it's unreliable.

For WOW implementation, we modified a lot in fw.c functions.
And correct some driver-firmware interface behaviors. To make sure the
firmware is running as expected. But the patches are still holding in my hand.
I can attach them in this patch set, and apparently I should. I will separate
them out of WOW patch set and resend again.

> 
> So it's not clear if you should be trying to accurately report
> everything (even if your firmware status reports are unreliable), or if
> you should just drop the REPORTS_TX_ACK_STATUS feature.

I think we should keep this feature. Because we actually can report status,
despite not for every packet. The only problem is when we use `iw wlan0
station dump` we could get *no* packet loss (like I've mentioned above,
report TX_STAT_ACK for every other packets not have
IEEE80211_TX_CTL_REQ_TX_STATUS). We cannot accurately report
everything by firmware report, it takes too many tx bandwidth, and
the performance will degrade severely. If we really cannot accept reporting
tx status this way, we need to find another way to solve it. That means I
need some time to investigate and test connect monitor system and get
a better report logic if we drop the REPORTS_TX_ACK_STATUS feature.
Or if you have a point of view, we can discuss about it.
Thanks!

> 
> > +			continue;
> > +		}
> >  		ieee80211_tx_info_clear_status(info);
> > -		info->flags |= IEEE80211_TX_STAT_ACK;
> >  		ieee80211_tx_status_irqsafe(hw, skb);
> 
> One other problem with your code is that it doesn't check for
> IEEE80211_TX_CTL_NO_ACK anywhere. With that flag, you should be
> reporting IEEE80211_TX_STAT_NOACK_TRANSMITTED instead of
> IEEE80211_TX_STAT_ACK.

Should add the check with that restored line I mentioned for pci.c

> 
> >  	}
> >
> 
> Brian
> 

Yan-Hsuan

  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-11  4:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-31 12:21 [PATCH 00/24] rtw88: major fixes for 8822c to have stable functionalities yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 01/24] rtw88: report correct tx status if mac80211 requested one yhchuang
2019-02-09  3:08   ` Brian Norris
2019-02-11  4:31     ` Tony Chuang [this message]
2019-02-11 19:21       ` Brian Norris
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 02/24] rtw88: add get_c2h_from_skb for extracting c2h commands yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 03/24] rtw88: can not support vif beacon filter actually yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 04/24] rtw88: fix incorrect bit definition for RF mode yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 05/24] rtw88: add a delay after writing a rf register yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 06/24] rtw88: 8822c: correct crystal setting yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 07/24] rtw88: 8822c: update efuse table as released yhchuang
2019-02-01  2:26   ` Brian Norris
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 08/24] rtw88: 8822c: update pwr_seq to v12 yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 09/24] rtw88: 8822c: update phy parameter to v27 yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 10/24] rtw88: 8822c: update channel setting yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 11/24] rtw88: 8822c: update trx mode setting yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 12/24] rtw88: add module param to switch lps supportability yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 13/24] rtw88: add 8822c tx power index table parsing support yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 14/24] rtw88: add 8822c tx agc support yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 15/24] rtw88: extract utility functions into util.c yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 16/24] rtw88: 8822c: add support for DACK yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 17/24] rtw88: 8822c: fix RSC setting yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 18/24] rtw88: 8822c: set ack timeout yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 19/24] rtw88: 8822c: do not reset MAC Rx before sending CCK packet yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 20/24] rtw88: 8822c: parse packet by sigb length yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 21/24] rtw88: do not count dummy tail into rx counter yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 22/24] rtw88: set OFDM ctx to receive ack after cts2self yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 23/24] rtw88: fix slot time value yhchuang
2019-01-31 12:21 ` [PATCH 24/24] rtw88: 8822b: turn rtw_write32s_mask into macro yhchuang
2019-02-01  1:24   ` Brian Norris
2019-02-11  2:29     ` Tony Chuang
2019-02-01  2:40 ` [PATCH 00/24] rtw88: major fixes for 8822c to have stable functionalities Brian Norris
2019-02-11  2:30   ` Tony Chuang

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=F7CD281DE3E379468C6D07993EA72F84D17A2A22@RTITMBSVM04.realtek.com.tw \
    --to=yhchuang@realtek.com \
    --cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
    --cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
    --cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sgruszka@redhat.com \
    --cc=tehuang@realtek.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).