Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker speaking, this time looking for a status update. On 18.11.21 18:41, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 03:33:05PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 03:12:01PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: >>> Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> >>>> (adding the new mhi list, yay) >>>> >>>> Hi Loic, >>>> >>>> Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>> >>>>>> Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 16 Sept 2021 at 10:00, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> At the moment I'm running my tests with commit 020d3b26c07a reverted and >>>>>>>> everything works without problems. Is there a simple way to fix this? Or >>>>>>>> maybe we should just revert the commit? Commit log and kernel logs from >>>>>>>> a failing case below. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you have log of success case? >>>>>> >>>>>> A log from a successful case in the end of email, using v5.15-rc1 plus >>>>>> revert of commit 020d3b26c07abe27. >>>>>> >>>>>>> To me, the device loses power, that is why MHI resuming is failing. >>>>>>> Normally the device should be properly recovered/reinitialized. Before >>>>>>> that patch the power loss was simply not detected (or handled at >>>>>>> higher stack level). >>>>>> >>>>>> Currently in ath11k we always keep the firmware running when in suspend, >>>>>> this is a workaround due to problems between mac80211 and MHI stack. >>>>>> IIRC the problem was something related MHI creating struct device during >>>>>> resume or something like that. >>>>> >>>>> Could you give a try with the attached patch? It should solve your >>>>> issue without breaking modem support. >>>> >>>> Sorry for taking so long, but I now tested your patch on top of >>>> v5.15-rc3 and, as expected, everything works as before with QCA6390 on >>>> NUC x86 testbox. >>>> >>>> Tested-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> I doubt we will find enough time to fully debug this mhi issue anytime >>> soon. Can we commit Loic's patch so that this regression is resolved? >>> >> >> Sorry no :( Eventhough Loic's patch is working, I want to understand the >> issue properly so that we could add a proper fix or patch the firmware >> if possible. >> >> Let's try to get the debug logs as I requested. > > I'm able to reproduce the issue on my NUC. I'm still investigating on how to > properly fix this issue. Expect a patch soon. Was there some progress? This issue was reported 75 days ago and still is not fixed. From the point of the Linux kernel regression tracker I'd say: it should not take this long. Looking back at it I wonder if 'reverted the culprit and reapply later together with a proper fix' would have been the better strategy. I wonder if that still would be the best way forward if no patch is forthcoming soon. Ciao, Thorsten #regzbot poke >>> At the moment I'm doing all my regression testing with commit >>> 020d3b26c07abe27 reverted. That's a risk, I would prefer to do my >>> testing without any hacks. >>> >>> -- >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ >>> >>> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches P.S.: As a Linux kernel regression tracker I'm getting a lot of reports on my table. I can only look briefly into most of them. Unfortunately therefore I sometimes will get things wrong or miss something important. I hope that's not the case here; if you think it is, don't hesitate to tell me about it in a public reply. That's in everyone's interest, as what I wrote above might be misleading to everyone reading this; any suggestion I gave they thus might sent someone reading this down the wrong rabbit hole, which none of us wants. BTW, I have no personal interest in this issue, which is tracked using regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot (https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/regzbot/). I'm only posting this mail to get things rolling again and hence don't need to be CC on all further activities wrt to this regression.
