Am Fr., 7. Juni 2024 um 08:10 Uhr schrieb Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) <regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On 06.06.24 23:23, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 4:46 PM Timo Schröder <der.timosch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> on my two notebooks, one with Ubuntu (Mainline Kernel 6.9.3, bluez > >> 5.7.2) and the other one with Manjaro (6.9.3, bluez 5.7.6) I'm having > >> problems with my Sony WH-1000XM3 and Shure BT1. Either A2DP or HFP/HSP > >> is not available after the connection has been established after a > >> reboot or a reconnection. It's reproducible that with the WH-1000XM3 > >> the A2DP profiles are missing and with the Shure BT1 HFP/HSP profiles > >> are missing. It also takes longer than usual to connect and I have a > >> log message in the journal: > >> > >> Jun 06 16:28:10 liebig bluetoothd[854]: > >> profiles/audio/avdtp.c:cancel_request() Discover: Connection timed out > >> (110) > >> > >> When I disable and re-enable bluetooth (while the Headsets are still > >> on) and trigger a reconnect from the notebooks, A2DP and HFP/HSP > >> Profiles are available again. > >> > >> I also tested it with 6.8.12 and it's the same problem. 6.8.11 and > >> 6.9.2 don't have the problem. > >> So I did a bisection. After reverting commit > >> af1d425b6dc67cd67809f835dd7afb6be4d43e03 "Bluetooth: HCI: Remove > >> HCI_AMP support" for 6.9.3 it's working again without problems. > >> > >> Let me know if you need anything from me. > > > > Wait what, that patch has nothing to do with any of these profiles not > > really sure how that would cause a regression really, are you sure you > > don't have actual connection timeout happening at the link layer and > > that by some chance didn't happen when running with HCI_AMP reverted? > > > > I'd be surprised that HCI_AMP has any effect in most controllers > > anyway, only virtual controllers was using that afaik. > > Stupid question from a bystander without knowledge in the field (so feel > free to ignore this): is that patch maybe causing trouble because it has > some hidden dependency on a earlier change that was not backported to > 6.9.y? > > Timo, to rule that out (and it's good to know in general, too) it would > be good to known if current mainline (e.g. 6.10-rc) is affected as well. > > Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat) > -- > Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking: > https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr > If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page. Hallo Thorsten, I tried with 6.10-rc2 and it's the same problem on my systems.
