Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > * Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> [191007 17:29]: >> We set WL1271_FLAG_IRQ_RUNNING in the beginning of wlcore_irq(), and test >> for it in wlcore_runtime_resume(). But WL1271_FLAG_IRQ_RUNNING currently >> gets cleared too early by wlcore_irq_locked() before wlcore_irq() is done >> calling it. And this will race against wlcore_runtime_resume() testing it. >> >> Let's set and clear IRQ_RUNNING in wlcore_irq() so wlcore_runtime_resume() >> can rely on it. And let's remove old comments about hardirq, that's no >> longer the case as we're using request_threaded_irq(). >> >> This fixes occasional annoying wlcore firmware reboots stat start with >> "wlcore: WARNING ELP wakeup timeout!" followed by a multisecond latency >> when the wlcore firmware gets wrongly rebooted waiting for an ELP wake >> interrupt that won't be coming. >> >> Note that I also suspect some form of this issue was the root cause why >> the wlcore GPIO interrupt has been often configured as a level interrupt >> instead of edge as an attempt to work around the ELP wake timeout errors. > > So this fixed a reproducable test case where loading some webpages > often produced ELP timeout errors. But looks like I'm still seeing ELP > timeouts elsewhere. So best to wait on this one. Something is still > wrong with the ELP timeout handling. Ok, I'll drop this then. Please send v3 once you think the patch is ready to be applied. -- https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
