From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from m43-7.mailgun.net ([69.72.43.7]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jkqAV-0001h5-UN for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 14:33:04 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: Wait until copy complete is actually done before completing From: Kalle Valo In-Reply-To: <20200609082015.1.Ife398994e5a0a6830e4d4a16306ef36e0144e7ba@changeid> References: <20200609082015.1.Ife398994e5a0a6830e4d4a16306ef36e0144e7ba@changeid> Message-Id: <20200615143237.5A57BC433CB@smtp.codeaurora.org> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 14:32:37 +0000 (UTC) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Douglas Anderson Cc: saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pillair@codeaurora.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jakub Kicinski , "David S. Miller" , kuabhs@google.com Douglas Anderson wrote: > On wcn3990 we have "per_ce_irq = true". That makes the > ath10k_ce_interrupt_summary() function always return 0xfff. The > ath10k_ce_per_engine_service_any() function will see this and think > that _all_ copy engines have an interrupt. Without checking, the > ath10k_ce_per_engine_service() assumes that if it's called that the > "copy complete" (cc) interrupt fired. This combination seems bad. > > Let's add a check to make sure that the "copy complete" interrupt > actually fired in ath10k_ce_per_engine_service(). > > This might fix a hard-to-reproduce failure where it appears that the > copy complete handlers run before the copy is really complete. > Specifically a symptom was that we were seeing this on a Qualcomm > sc7180 board: > arm-smmu 15000000.iommu: Unhandled context fault: > fsr=0x402, iova=0x7fdd45780, fsynr=0x30003, cbfrsynra=0xc1, cb=10 > > Even on platforms that don't have wcn3990 this still seems like it > would be a sane thing to do. Specifically the current IRQ handler > comments indicate that there might be other misc interrupt sources > firing that need to be cleared. If one of those sources was the one > that caused the IRQ handler to be called it would also be important to > double-check that the interrupt we cared about actually fired. > > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson > Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo ath10k firmwares work very differently, on what hardware and firmware did you test this? I'll add that information to the commit log. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11595887/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k