All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Prestwood <prestwoj@gmail.com>
To: Baochen Qiang <quic_bqiang@quicinc.com>, ath10k@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: ath10k: poll service ready message before failing
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 10:46:45 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6362d9b2-6ed2-4454-bf1b-8614d181bc93@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0ee7ae2f-8034-4908-b6e3-fa17a995c661@quicinc.com>

Hi Baochen,

On 2/21/24 6:18 PM, Baochen Qiang wrote:
>
>
> On 2/21/2024 8:38 PM, James Prestwood wrote:
>> Hi Baochen,
>>
>> On 2/20/24 7:17 PM, Baochen Qiang wrote:
>>> Currently host relies on CE interrupts to get notified that
>>> the service ready message is ready. This results in timeout
>>> issue if the interrupt is not fired, due to some unknown
>>> reasons. See below logs:
>>>
>>> [76321.937866] ath10k_pci 0000:02:00.0: wmi service ready event not 
>>> received
>>> ...
>>> [76322.016738] ath10k_pci 0000:02:00.0: Could not init core: -110
>>>
>>> And finally it causes WLAN interface bring up failure.
>>>
>>> Change to give it one more chance here by polling CE rings,
>>> before failing directly.
>>>
>>> Tested-on: QCA6174 hw3.2 PCI WLAN.RM.4.4.1-00157-QCARMSWPZ-1
>>>
>>> Fixes: 5e3dd157d7e7 ("ath10k: mac80211 driver for Qualcomm Atheros 
>>> 802.11ac CQA98xx devices")
>>> Reported-by: James Prestwood <prestwoj@gmail.com>
>>> Link: 
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/304ce305-fbe6-420e-ac2a-d61ae5e6ca1a@gmail.com/
>>> Signed-off-by: Baochen Qiang <quic_bqiang@quicinc.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++---
>>>   1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.c 
>>> b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.c
>>> index ddf15717d504..bf6cb2c73128 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.c
>>> @@ -1763,12 +1763,28 @@ void ath10k_wmi_put_wmi_channel(struct 
>>> ath10k *ar, struct wmi_channel *ch,
>>>   int ath10k_wmi_wait_for_service_ready(struct ath10k *ar)
>>>   {
>>> -    unsigned long time_left;
>>> +    unsigned long time_left, i;
>>>       time_left = wait_for_completion_timeout(&ar->wmi.service_ready,
>>>                           WMI_SERVICE_READY_TIMEOUT_HZ);
>>> -    if (!time_left)
>>> -        return -ETIMEDOUT;
>>> +    if (!time_left) {
>>> +        /* Sometimes the PCI HIF doesn't receive interrupt
>>> +         * for the service ready message even if the buffer
>>> +         * was completed. PCIe sniffer shows that it's
>>> +         * because the corresponding CE ring doesn't fires
>>> +         * it. Workaround here by polling CE rings once.
>>> +         */
>>> +        ath10k_warn(ar, "failed to receive service ready 
>>> completion, polling..\n");
>>> +
>>> +        for (i = 0; i < CE_COUNT; i++)
>>> +            ath10k_hif_send_complete_check(ar, i, 1);
>>> +
>>> +        time_left = 
>>> wait_for_completion_timeout(&ar->wmi.service_ready,
>>> +                            WMI_SERVICE_READY_TIMEOUT_HZ);
>>> +        if (!time_left)
>>> +            return -ETIMEDOUT;
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>>       return 0;
>>>   }
>>>
>>> base-commit: 707e306f3573fa321ae197d77366578e4566cff5
>>
>> Thank you for looking at this I will test this and see if it resolves 
>> the problem we're seeing but since its somewhat rare it may take me a 
>> bit to validate.
>>
>> Is this any different than just trying to bring up the interface 
>> again from userspace? I could be wrong, but my concern with this is 
>> that when I retried in userspace things got into a very odd state:
>>
>>   - IWD starts
>>
>>   - ifdown interface
>>
>>   - ifup interface, timeout -110
>>
>>   - Retry ifup, success
>>
>>   - Authenticate/associate succeed
>>
>>   - 4-way handshake fails because the device never received the 1/4 
>> frame.
>>
> Don't get time to look into this case, but I suppose there might be 
> some issues in error handling when interface up fails, kind of 
> incorrect irq enable/disable or something else impacting data path, so 
> no data frame received even after a second interface up retry succeeds,
>
> Anyway please test this patch, which is supposed to be the right fix 
> to this issue.

This does appear to have fixed it! For reference this was my test:

  for i in $(seq 1 100000); do sudo ip link set wlan0 down; sudo ip link 
set wlan0 up; echo $?; done

I never saw the up command fail, and after a while I noticed one of the 
iterations took a bit longer to complete. Checked dmesg and saw:

[ 1006.017198] ath10k_pci 0000:02:00.0: failed to receive service ready 
completion, polling..
[ 1006.017295] ath10k_pci 0000:02:00.0: service ready completion 
received, continuing normally

I then started IWD and it was able to connect fine (data frames were 
being passed). I was able to trigger this 3 times relatively quickly, 
each time IWD connected afterwards. So from my end this appears fixed.

You can add tested-by me if you like:

Tested-By: James Prestwood <prestwoj@gmail.com> # on QCA6174 hw3.2


>
>> IWD would then retry indefinitely with auth/assoc succeeding but 
>> never receiving any 4-way handshake frames. The only way to get 
>> things working again was reloading the ath10k driver/reboot. Maybe 
>> this patch is different because its waiting for the initial request 
>> and no issuing a second one? Just wanted to point that out in case it 
>> sheds any light.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> James
>>


  reply	other threads:[~2024-02-28 18:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-21  3:17 [PATCH] wifi: ath10k: poll service ready message before failing Baochen Qiang
2024-02-21 12:38 ` James Prestwood
2024-02-22  2:18   ` Baochen Qiang
2024-02-28 18:46     ` James Prestwood [this message]
2024-02-28 21:31       ` Jeff Johnson
2024-02-26 10:45 ` Kalle Valo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=6362d9b2-6ed2-4454-bf1b-8614d181bc93@gmail.com \
    --to=prestwoj@gmail.com \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=quic_bqiang@quicinc.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.