Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 02:36:13PM +0100, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: >> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > >> >> [+cc vtolkm] >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 04:43:20PM +0100, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone >> >>> >> >>> I'm trying to get a mainline kernel to run on my Turris Omnia, and am >> >>> having some trouble getting the PCI bus to work correctly. Specifically, >> >>> I'm running a 5.10-rc1 kernel (torvalds/master as of this moment), with >> >>> the resource request fix[0] applied on top. >> >>> >> >>> The kernel boots fine, and the patch in [0] makes the PCI devices show >> >>> up. But I'm still getting initialisation errors like these: >> >>> >> >>> [ 1.632709] pci 0000:01:00.0: BAR 0: error updating (0xe0000004 != 0xffffffff) >> >>> [ 1.632714] pci 0000:01:00.0: BAR 0: error updating (high 0x000000 != 0xffffffff) >> >>> [ 1.632745] pci 0000:02:00.0: BAR 0: error updating (0xe0200004 != 0xffffffff) >> >>> [ 1.632750] pci 0000:02:00.0: BAR 0: error updating (high 0x000000 != 0xffffffff) >> >>> >> >>> and the WiFi drivers fail to initialise with what appears to me to be >> >>> errors related to the bus rather than to the drivers themselves: >> >>> >> >>> [ 3.509878] ath: phy0: Mac Chip Rev 0xfffc0.f is not supported by this driver >> >>> [ 3.517049] ath: phy0: Unable to initialize hardware; initialization status: -95 >> >>> [ 3.524473] ath9k 0000:01:00.0: Failed to initialize device >> >>> [ 3.530081] ath9k: probe of 0000:01:00.0 failed with error -95 >> >>> [ 3.536012] ath10k_pci 0000:02:00.0: of_irq_parse_pci: failed with rc=134 >> >>> [ 3.543049] pci 0000:00:02.0: enabling device (0140 -> 0142) >> >>> [ 3.548735] ath10k_pci 0000:02:00.0: can't change power state from D3hot to D0 (config space inaccessible) >> >>> [ 3.588592] ath10k_pci 0000:02:00.0: failed to wake up device : -110 >> >>> [ 3.595098] ath10k_pci: probe of 0000:02:00.0 failed with error -110 >> >>> >> >>> lspci looks OK, though: >> >>> >> >>> # lspci >> >>> 00:01.0 PCI bridge: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Device 6820 (rev 04) >> >>> 00:02.0 PCI bridge: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Device 6820 (rev 04) >> >>> 00:03.0 PCI bridge: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Device 6820 (rev 04) >> >>> 01:00.0 Network controller: Qualcomm Atheros AR9287 Wireless Network Adapter (PCI-Express) (rev 01) >> >>> 02:00.0 Network controller: Qualcomm Atheros QCA986x/988x 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter (rev ff) >> >>> >> >>> Does anyone have any clue what could be going on here? Is this a bug, or >> >>> did I miss something in my config or other initialisation? I've tried >> >>> with both the stock u-boot distributed with the board, and with an >> >>> upstream u-boot from latest master; doesn't seem to make any different. >> >> >> >> Can you try turning off CONFIG_PCIEASPM? We had a similar recent >> >> report at https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=209833 but I >> >> don't think we have a fix yet. >> > >> > Yes! Turning that off does indeed help! Thanks a bunch :) >> > >> > You mention that bisecting this would be helpful - I can try that >> > tomorrow; any idea when this was last working? >> >> OK, so I tried to bisect this, but, erm, I couldn't find a working >> revision to start from? I went all the way back to 4.10 (which is the >> first version to include the device tree file for the Omnia), and even >> on that, the wireless cards were failing to initialise with ASPM >> enabled... > > I have no personal experience with this device; all I know is that the > bugzilla suggests that it worked in v5.4, which isn't much help. > > Possibly the apparent regression was really a .config change, i.e., > CONFIG_PCIEASPM was disabled in the v5.4 kernel vtolkm@ tested and it > "worked" but got enabled later and it started failing? Yeah, I suspect so. The OpenWrt config disables CONFIG_PCIEASPM by default and only turns it on for specific targets. So I guess that it's most likely that this has never worked... > Maybe the debug patch below would be worth trying to see if it makes > any difference? If it *does* help, try omitting the first hunk to see > if we just need to apply the quirk_enable_clear_retrain_link() quirk. Tried, doesn't help... -Toke
