Bug 566696

Summary: iwl5000/5300 fail to transmit data on N-only netwrok
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Reporter: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka>
Component: kernelAssignee: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Red Hat Kernel QE team <kernel-qe>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 5.5CC: cmeadors, cward, james, linville, peterm, qcai
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-03-30 07:46:26 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 526948    
Attachments:
Description Flags
Upstream fixes backported to RHEL5 none

Description Stanislaw Gruszka 2010-02-19 13:28:08 UTC
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
kernel-2.6.18-189.el5
This is upstream firmware bug, see it on 2.6.32 and newer kernels, not reproducible on 2.6.31.

How reproducible:
Always.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Configure AP in N-only network mode 
2. Wait for NetworkManager connect to the network
3. Start browsing internet, browser will stuck. 
  
Additional info:
Reported upstream, working on positing workaround for it
http://bugzilla.intellinuxwireless.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2160

Comment 1 John W. Linville 2010-02-19 14:03:02 UTC
Hmmm...well apparently I have a knack for only buying equpment that works.  FWIW I have not seen this on my TEW-652BRP AP (or the WNR854T) in 802.11n-only mode when used with the iwlagn driver (on various hardware).  FWIW my APs are using channels in the 2GHz range.

How much testing have you done with the patch from below?

http://bugzilla.intellinuxwireless.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2160#c4

Comment 2 John W. Linville 2010-02-19 14:07:29 UTC
I take it back -- I do get the "iwlagn 0000:a0:00.0: iwl_tx_agg_start on ra = 00:23:69:35:d1:3f tid = 0" error (different MAC in my case), but my connections seems to be fine.

Comment 3 John W. Linville 2010-02-19 14:11:41 UTC
FWIW, I'm not sure that iwl_tx_agg_start message is actually an error.  The code uses IWL_WARN, but it seems more informational than anything.

Comment 4 John W. Linville 2010-02-19 14:13:29 UTC
OK, sorry -- you are saying this is specific to iwl5x00 -- I'll try to reproduce there.

Comment 5 Stanislaw Gruszka 2010-02-19 14:42:48 UTC
iwlagn 0000:a0:00.0: iwl_tx_agg_start on ra = 00:23:69:35:d1:3f tid = 0
is not an error, I have it also on 2.6.31 where everything was just fine.

I run patch on 2.6.33-rc7, but I only checked if it fix the issue, not really test. I would like to put it or some better version into 2.6.32 stable tree, if Reinette agree. Intel and upstream users should give it enough testing.

Comment 6 Stanislaw Gruszka 2010-02-19 14:48:05 UTC
Parameters:2.4GHz, Channel width: 20MHz only, Standard channel: auto, Security mode: WPA2-Personal, Encryption: AES.

Comment 7 Stanislaw Gruszka 2010-02-19 15:01:42 UTC
This bug happens when both 2.4GHz and 5GHz wireless networks are enabled on my AP (it is dual band). After disabling 5GHz bandwidth, bug disappears.

Comment 8 John W. Linville 2010-02-19 15:08:52 UTC
That is an interesting observation.  What if you select a specific 5GHz channel (rather than auto)?  I presume that selecting a specific 2GHz channel would be equivalent to disable 5GHz...

Comment 9 Stanislaw Gruszka 2010-02-19 15:23:18 UTC
Reinette posted "iwlwifi: sanity check before counting number of tfds can be free" patch which most likely fix that bug. I'm going to test.

Comment 10 Stanislaw Gruszka 2010-02-19 16:26:16 UTC
Nope. Applying both:
[PATCH 2/3] iwlwifi: sanity check before counting number of tfds can be free
[PATCH 3/3] iwlwifi: error checking for number of tfds in queue
They do not fix.

Comment 11 John W. Linville 2010-02-19 16:56:50 UTC
Alright, (as expected) I can't recreate this on my (2GHz-only) AP in 802.11n-only mode w/ iwl5100 device running a -189.el5-based kernel.  I will rely on Stansilaw to continue pursuing this upstream and hope/anticipate that RHEL5's current closeness to the upstream codebase will yield a patch that fixes (or at least helps) both RHEL5 and upstream.

Comment 12 Stanislaw Gruszka 2010-02-22 16:32:24 UTC
Created attachment 395506 [details]
Upstream fixes backported to RHEL5

Comment 13 RHEL Program Management 2010-02-23 15:36:22 UTC
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release.  Product Management has requested
further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed
products.  This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update
release.

Comment 15 Cameron Meadors 2010-02-23 20:02:57 UTC
I can't reproduce this either.  I tested on snap2 client x86_64 on iwl5000
against an 802.11n only open access point.  I was able to open a browser and
connect to a web server over wireless.

Comment 16 Stanislaw Gruszka 2010-02-24 08:11:03 UTC
To reproduce is you need to have dual band AP. Maybe even my particular AP model, (WRT610N V1). I think you can believe me, that patch fix the issue :) If QE want to do something regard this bug, may just test if it not cause any regression.

Comment 18 Jarod Wilson 2010-03-03 15:45:24 UTC
in kernel-2.6.18-191.el5
You can download this test kernel from http://people.redhat.com/jwilson/el5

Please update the appropriate value in the Verified field
(cf_verified) to indicate this fix has been successfully
verified. Include a comment with verification details.

Comment 22 errata-xmlrpc 2010-03-30 07:46:26 UTC
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0178.html