On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 12:59:48PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > Hi Mathias, > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 05:15:00PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > Hi Mathias, > > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 02:01:30PM +0300, Mathias Nyman wrote: > > > On 21.06.2018 03:53, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > > > Hi Mathias, Andy, > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 10:40:03AM +0300, Mathias Nyman wrote: > > > > > On 06.06.2018 19:45, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > <snip> > > > > > > Can you share a bit more details on the platform you are using, and what types of test you are running. > > > > Sorry for the delayed reply, I was in Tokyo for the OSS. > > > > It is a board based on "Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU E3840 @ 1.91GHz". > > The usb device in question is a bluetooth device: > > > > Bus 001 Device 012: ID 8087:07dc Intel Corp. > <snip> > > > > And the problem that we are seeing is with phone calls via bluetooth. > > > > > Does my test above trigger the case? (show "MATTU dmatest match!") > > > > I have kept it for tonight, will see the results tomorrow morning. > > And I am using that same device in the usb script to change "authrized". > > No, your test did not trigger the error. :( > > But, my last night's test (with an added debug to get some extra trace for addresses) showed the same error of - > "Looking for event-dma", but looking at the ftrace, I could not see it getting same address from dma_pool_zalloc(). > > Can you please have a look at the dmesg and ftrace at: > https://drive.google.com/open?id=1nMy_qVxOQzcZNYa9bw7az9WiS2MZzdKo And to add to my previous mail, in another cycle where I do see the same problem and my extra debugs give the following: <...>-23974 [002] .... 495.991276: xhci_ring_mem_detail: MATTU xhci_segment_alloc dma @ 0x000000002d21c000 <...>-23974 [002] .... 495.991285: xhci_ring_mem_detail: SUDIP page details dma=0x000000002d21c000, vaddr=ed21c000, inuse=1, offset=0 <...>-23974 [002] .... 495.991289: xhci_ring_mem_detail: MATTU xhci_segment_alloc dma @ 0x000000002d21c000 <...>-23974 [002] .... 495.991292: xhci_ring_mem_detail: SUDIP page details dma=0x000000002d21c000, vaddr=ed21c000, inuse=2, offset=0 <...>-23974 [002] .... 495.991295: xhci_ring_alloc: ISOC f0b62900: enq 0x000000002d21c000(0x000000002d21c000) deq 0x000000002d21c000(0x000000002d21c000) segs 2 stream 0 free_trbs 509 bounce 17 cycle 1 <...>-23974 [002] .... 495.991298: xhci_ring_mem_detail: MATTU xhci_segment_alloc dma @ 0x000000002d21c000 <...>-23974 [002] .... 495.991301: xhci_ring_mem_detail: SUDIP page details dma=0x000000002d21c000, vaddr=ed21c000, inuse=3, offset=0 <...>-23974 [002] .... 495.991304: xhci_ring_mem_detail: MATTU xhci_segment_alloc dma @ 0x000000002d21c000 <...>-23974 [002] .... 495.991306: xhci_ring_mem_detail: SUDIP page details dma=0x000000002d21c000, vaddr=ed21c000, inuse=4, offset=0 I am totally lost now. Are we looking at two different issues? This log shows same addresses, my previous mail and log did not show the same addresses. :( -- Regards Sudip -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
