On Mar 13 Peter Hurley wrote:
> On 03/13/2014 09:59 AM, Stefan Richter wrote:
> > Incidentally, the mailman brought me a dual FW643-e2 card just yesterday
> > (IOI FWBX2-PCIE1XE220 alias Delock 89208). I will try to reproduce the
> > issue as time permits. I take it from your previous messages that it is
> > not quite sure whether or not this is influenced by a long pause between
> > LPS-enable and first PHY register access.
>
> I have _never_ observed this failure with either my original patch
> which broke FW323 init nor my follow-up patch series which fixed the FW323
> init breakage.
>
> > Until the proper cure to this rarely occurring problem with FW643-e2 is
> > found,
>
> Rarely occurring to whom? Non-FW643 rev8 devices?
There has been never a report against FW323, FW643, or FW643-e.
There has been only your report against FW643-e2 (alias FW643 rev8).
Otherwise, related or not, there has been Clemens' reply to Jay on
January 31:
> Jay Fenlason wrote:
>> on a machine here with a LSI FW322/323 chip, firewire_ohci sometimes (~20% of
>> the time or so) fails to probe successfully because it fails to read phy reg 4.
[This was the frequent read_phy_reg failure during .probe() due to bd972688.]
> I got a few of these messages for my LSI FW643e; sometimes when unloading
> firewire-ohci.
[i.e. an occasional read_phy_reg failure during .remove().]
Clemens, is it an FW643-e (rev7) or FW643-e2 (rev8)?
And then there was your (Peter's) message on March 5:
> I'm sorry but I can no longer reproduce the phy failure on the FW643e rev 8
> (phy rev b), so I have no way to test this fix for that failure.
Now you had one occurrence of what certainly is the pre-bd972688 problem.
Without knowing how often you started firewire-ohci since after March 5,
I assumed this to be "rarely" occurring. Maybe prematurely so.
In any case, so far it seems to be an FW643-e2 specific problem.
> When I fixed this the first time, the failure was easily repeatable.
Then it was not (easily) repeatable for some (maybe brief) period.
> With your revert, the failure has returned.
>
> > I prefer to have the current fix-by-revert spreading out to the
> > various stable kernel branches, since it fixes the frequent FW323
> > initialization failure (which had about 30% chance of occurrence with
> > CONFIG_HZ=1000).
>
> Ok. I can carry the FW643 rev8 fixes as needed.
[...]
> As I originally reported, the failure is manifested before the update to
> phy reg 5 in configure_1394a_enhancements(). A dump of phy reg 5 when
> it is read in update_phy_reg() returns the value 0x19 (Watchdog, Pwr_fail,
> Timeout).
>
> I intend to lightly instrument ohci_enable() and the phy reg functions
> with ftrace to obtain timestamps and register values during initialization.
Good; mainline and stable shall of course get the FW643-e2 fix right
away when one was proven by instrumentation or at least by reproduction
of the higherlevel symptoms.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-====- --== -==-=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html