Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Sep 2008 00:55:35 -0700 | From | "Steven Noonan" <> | Subject | Re: [ath9k-devel] ath9k: massive unexplained latency in 2.6.27 (rc5, rc6, probably others) |
| |
2008/9/23 Steven Noonan <steven@uplinklabs.net>: > On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez > <lrodriguez@atheros.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 8:11 AM, Steven Noonan <steven@uplinklabs.net> wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 1:06 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez >>> <lrodriguez@atheros.com> wrote: >>>> Please test the following patch. >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c >>>> index c262ef2..9a51739 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c >>>> @@ -681,10 +681,12 @@ int ath_open(struct ath_softc *sc, struct ath9k_channel *initial_chan) >>>> * Enable MIB interrupts when there are hardware phy counters. >>>> * Note we only do this (at the moment) for station mode. >>>> */ >>>> +#if 0 >>>> if (ath9k_hw_phycounters(ah) && >>>> ((sc->sc_ah->ah_opmode == ATH9K_M_STA) || >>>> (sc->sc_ah->ah_opmode == ATH9K_M_IBSS))) >>>> sc->sc_imask |= ATH9K_INT_MIB; >>>> +#endif >>>> /* >>>> * Some hardware processes the TIM IE and fires an >>>> * interrupt when the TIM bit is set. For hardware >>>> >>> >>> It didn't apply to -rc7, but I managed to apply it manually >>> (apparently you made this for wireless-testing?) and added the #if 0. >>> After 7 hours uptime with the driver, no apparent interrupt storm. >>> >>> I'll do more thorough testing later, but I have a 3 hour drive today, >>> and some packing to do, so it'll need to wait a bit. >> >> Yeah I did it for wireless-testing. Good to hear this so far has >> solved the issue. I'll port it to 27 and post it once I get your >> blessings that this fixed it by a Tested-by. >> > > Okay. I'm in Seattle now. > > Yes, it solved the issue, but surely an #if 0 isn't a proper solution. > What's the actual bug here? I'm afraid the meaning of what's going on > here isn't exactly intuitive. > > Also, I'm doing an 8 hour run with this patch tonight. Maybe more, > depends on when I wake up. ;) > > I think if this resolves the issue on two separate ≈8 hour runs, it > should be considered the solution to the issue, unless it resurfaces. >
I am only 25 minutes into the run, but I feel this is worth reporting before I forget. No IRQ storm thus far, but the connection keeps dropping. Or rather, it doesn't disassociate, but while I was transferring a large file, it had points of time where it suddenly lost and reacquired the connection (signal strength fluctuates wildly between 70-90% and then 0% for a second, and then back to fluctuating). Perhaps this is related to the lack of aggregation?
- Steven
| |