[PATCH] nl80211: Do not clear send_frame_cookie on TX wait expiration
ilan.peer at intel.com
Thu Feb 23 07:23:34 PST 2023
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jouni Malinen <j at w1.fi>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 18:43
> To: Otcheretianski, Andrei <andrei.otcheretianski at intel.com>
> Cc: hostap at lists.infradead.org; Peer, Ilan <ilan.peer at intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] nl80211: Do not clear send_frame_cookie on TX wait
> On Sun, Jan 01, 2023 at 02:59:49PM +0200, Andrei Otcheretianski wrote:
> > With mac80211 based drivers the NL80211_CMD_FRAME_WAIT_CANCEL
> can be
> > notified to user space while the driver is still handling the frame.
> > In such cases, when the driver is done handling the frame it would
> > indicate the frame handling status to mac80211, which would trigger
> > NL80211_CMD_FRAME_TX_STATUS notification to user space.
> This feels a bit strange.. Would you happen to have a wpa_supplicant debug
> log with timestamps showing such a case?
The log file is attached. Note that this is using an innternal hostap version we are maintaining.
> NL80211_CMD_FRAME_WAIT_CANCEL is documented to be used as an
> event "whenever the driver has completed the off-channel wait time" which
> is supposed to be talking about the wait for the response. Why would the
> driver be still processing the _transmitted_ request frame if it has already
> indicated that it is not waiting for a response anymore? Is there really a case
> where the TX status gets delayed so much that this continues beyond the
> end of the maximum wait for the response?
In this case the FW was not able to transmit the frame since the medium was very
busy. In this specific case the handling of the wait end event and the Tx complete status are
done asynchronously, where the remain on channel is handled before the Tx complete,
thus resulting with the scenario described here.
> > However, the nl80211 driver logic handling for
> > NL80211_CMD_FRAME_WAIT_CANCEL clears the send_frame_cookie, so
> > the NL80211_CMD_FRAME_TX_STATUS arrives it is being ignored.
> > As a result, wpa_supplicant flows, e.g., P2P GoN confirm transmission
> > etc., are stuck (since Tx wait expiration is not handled by the
> > wpa_supplicant other than in the context of DPP).
> > Fix this issue by not clearing the send_frame_cookie as part of the
> > NL80211_CMD_FRAME_WAIT_CANCEL handling.
> This clearing was added here:
> The proposed changes here seem to partially revert that commit. Is it really
> correct to not revert more if this new change is indeed needed?
> What about the change in wpa_driver_nl80211_send_action_cancel_wait()?
I do not think so. The change in wpa_driver_nl80211_send_action_cancel_wait()
seems valid to me, as it initiates cancelling of wait operation only if it has a valid
cookie. This makes sense to me.
> Would there be a way to achieve both the cleanup in that earlier commit and
> this strangely delayed TX status event handling? If not, the new commit
> message would at least need to explain that this results in those old
> confusing log entries starting to show up again.
I considered adding handling for EVENT_TX_WAIT_EXPIRE event in the wpa_supplicant, where
the offchannel logic would clear the current ' pending_action_tx'. Would this make more sense?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 316874 bytes
More information about the Hostap