On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 07:17:59AM +0100, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 12:04, Tom Psyborg <pozega.tomislav@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > rt2x00usb_vendor_request: Error - Vendor Request X failed for offset X > > > with error -110 > > > [many of these, system is slowly locking up] > > > > > > So the only clue that I had was that perhaps rt2x00usb_vendor_request > > > wasn't catching the correct return value. > > > > Hi > > > > error message vendor request failed - do you get it on a real hardware > > or in virtualized environment? > > I only run these on bare metal. What I assume so far is that when > rt2x00usb_vendor_request starts failing like this, the MCU has failed. > Power cycling the system helps but is undesirable, and sometimes so > does a forced removal of rt2800usb, a short recovery period (cooling > down, reloading the firmware?) and then loading the module again. > > But the problem I am looking to solve is not a hardware problem, it is > recovering gracefully from a failure in the RT5592, so I have been > looking intently at rt2x00usb_vendor_request because that's the > function that complains loudly and kills the entire kernel when the > RT5592 sees this failure. So would be below patch (on top of this set) be a solution for at least to not kill the kernel. Or we looking for something better i.e. watchdog ? Regards Stanislaw diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00usb.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00usb.c index 60b8bccab83d..ee5bd0efd2c7 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00usb.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00usb.c @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ static bool rt2x00usb_check_usb_error(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev, int status) if (status == -ENODEV || status == -ENOENT) return true; - if (status == -EPROTO) + if (status == -EPROTO || status == -ETIMEDOUT) rt2x00dev->num_proto_errs++; else rt2x00dev->num_proto_errs = 0;
