[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <D7JLLQ79FP2Z.2Z7VYLSC52A2U@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2025 11:44:04 +0100
From: "Nicolas Escande" <nico.escande@...il.com>
To: "Aditya Kumar Singh" <aditya.kumar.singh@....qualcomm.com>, "Kalle Valo"
<kvalo@...nel.org>, "Jeff Johnson" <jjohnson@...nel.org>
Cc: <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, <ath12k@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] wifi: ath12k: handle change_vif_links() callback
On Tue Feb 4, 2025 at 11:23 AM CET, Aditya Kumar Singh wrote:
> On 2/4/25 15:32, Nicolas Escande wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> When applying this series I am no longer able to start an AP on a DFS channel.
>> (I don't know specifically which patch though)
>>
>
> Thanks for reporting this. I think non-DFS channel should be working
> fine right?
Right non DFS channels are ok, only DFS ones, and not from the get go but after
the initial CAC, when they switch to operational mode.
>
> Anyways, I'm able to repro the issue locally. Let me investigate further
> and come back.
I'll happily test what you can throw at me.
>
>> After the initial CAC period I get the following kernel message:
>> [ 45.248441] ath12k_pci 0003:01:00.0: cannot install key for non-existent peer 3a:07:16:d8:00:08
>> And then hostapd goes in failed state:
>> wlan0: interface state UNINITIALIZED->COUNTRY_UPDATE
>> ACS: Automatic channel selection started, this may take a bit
>> wlan0: interface state COUNTRY_UPDATE->ACS
>> wlan0: ACS-STARTED
>> wlan0: ACS-COMPLETED freq=5620 channel=124
>> wlan0: interface state ACS->DFS
>> wlan0: DFS-CAC-START freq=5620 chan=124 sec_chan=1, width=2, seg0=114, seg1=0, cac_time=5s
>> wlan0: DFS-CAC-COMPLETED success=1 freq=5620 ht_enabled=0 chan_offset=0 chan_width=5 cf1=5570 cf2=0 radar_detected=0
>> wlan0: nl80211: kernel reports: key addition failed
>> Interface initialization failed
>> wlan0: interface state DFS->DISABLED
>> wlan0: AP-DISABLED
>>
>> Maybe I missed something ? Is there another series this one depends upon that I
>> should have applied before ?
>
> No known dependency as such.
Good, as I have a few other series applied in my tree I was affraid it might be
something on my side.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists