All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: Wen Gong <wgong@qti.qualcomm.com>
Cc: "Michał Kazior" <kazikcz@gmail.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>,
	"Wen Gong" <wgong@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: Remove ATH10K_STATE_RESTARTED in simulate fw crash
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 15:32:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877eea8kys.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e18e50cae69e44f4b9e4abb1fa110193@aptaiexm02f.ap.qualcomm.com> (Wen Gong's message of "Tue, 8 Jan 2019 08:45:26 +0000")

Wen Gong <wgong@qti.qualcomm.com> writes:

>> > > > It is because the state has not changed to ATH10K_STATE_ON
>> > > > immediately, then it will have more than two simulate crash
>> > > > process running meanwhile, and complete/wakeup some field twice,
>> > > > it destroy the normal recovery process.
>> > >
>> > > This was intended to allow testing not only firmware crash path (and
>> > > recovery) but also firmware crash while recovering from a firmware crash.
>> > >
>> > If firmware is recovering from crash, then simulate a new crash will trigger
>> error.
>> > So remove it.
>> 
>> That's actually a feature, not a bug. If firmware crashes while driver is
>> restarting after a crash then its likely going to fail again and again causing a
>> crash-restart loop which can affect system performance and responsiveness.
>> It's better to give up and let the system admin take over.
>> 
>> If it's still bothering you then please consider a crash counter threshold so
>> that, e.g. after 5 crash-while-restarting it's going to give up. However I doubt
>> it's worth the effort. My experience tells me firmware crashes during
>> recovery are rarely, if at all, transient.
>> 
>> The simulated fw crash is not representative here. It's a mere tool to test
>> driver code.
>
> The simulated fw crash is only a tool for user to trigger fw crash
> with command

I think Michal knows what simulate_fw_crash as he is the one who
implemented it in commit 278c4a85e626 :)

> This change's purpose is to disallow user to trigger fw crash if the fw is not in a
> Normal state.
>
> If the fw is in recovering state triggered by user's command or by fw, then it will
> disallow user to run command to trigger fw crash again until fw become to a normal
> State.

I agree with Michal here and his proposal about having a crash counter
sounds like a good to me. So I'm dropping this patch.

-- 
Kalle Valo

_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: Wen Gong <wgong@qti.qualcomm.com>
Cc: "Michał Kazior" <kazikcz@gmail.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>,
	"Wen Gong" <wgong@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: Remove ATH10K_STATE_RESTARTED in simulate fw crash
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 15:32:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877eea8kys.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e18e50cae69e44f4b9e4abb1fa110193@aptaiexm02f.ap.qualcomm.com> (Wen Gong's message of "Tue, 8 Jan 2019 08:45:26 +0000")

Wen Gong <wgong@qti.qualcomm.com> writes:

>> > > > It is because the state has not changed to ATH10K_STATE_ON
>> > > > immediately, then it will have more than two simulate crash
>> > > > process running meanwhile, and complete/wakeup some field twice,
>> > > > it destroy the normal recovery process.
>> > >
>> > > This was intended to allow testing not only firmware crash path (and
>> > > recovery) but also firmware crash while recovering from a firmware crash.
>> > >
>> > If firmware is recovering from crash, then simulate a new crash will trigger
>> error.
>> > So remove it.
>> 
>> That's actually a feature, not a bug. If firmware crashes while driver is
>> restarting after a crash then its likely going to fail again and again causing a
>> crash-restart loop which can affect system performance and responsiveness.
>> It's better to give up and let the system admin take over.
>> 
>> If it's still bothering you then please consider a crash counter threshold so
>> that, e.g. after 5 crash-while-restarting it's going to give up. However I doubt
>> it's worth the effort. My experience tells me firmware crashes during
>> recovery are rarely, if at all, transient.
>> 
>> The simulated fw crash is not representative here. It's a mere tool to test
>> driver code.
>
> The simulated fw crash is only a tool for user to trigger fw crash
> with command

I think Michal knows what simulate_fw_crash as he is the one who
implemented it in commit 278c4a85e626 :)

> This change's purpose is to disallow user to trigger fw crash if the fw is not in a
> Normal state.
>
> If the fw is in recovering state triggered by user's command or by fw, then it will
> disallow user to run command to trigger fw crash again until fw become to a normal
> State.

I agree with Michal here and his proposal about having a crash counter
sounds like a good to me. So I'm dropping this patch.

-- 
Kalle Valo

  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-08 13:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-11-14  2:50 [PATCH] ath10k: Remove ATH10K_STATE_RESTARTED in simulate fw crash Wen Gong
2018-11-14  2:50 ` Wen Gong
2018-11-14  7:48 ` Michał Kazior
2018-11-14  7:48   ` Michał Kazior
2019-01-07  7:16   ` Wen Gong
2019-01-07  7:16     ` Wen Gong
2019-01-07  8:35     ` Michał Kazior
2019-01-07  8:35       ` Michał Kazior
2019-01-08  8:45       ` Wen Gong
2019-01-08  8:45         ` Wen Gong
2019-02-08 13:32         ` Kalle Valo [this message]
2019-02-08 13:32           ` Kalle Valo
2019-02-08 13:34           ` Kalle Valo
2019-02-08 13:34             ` Kalle Valo
2019-04-01  6:11       ` Wen Gong
2019-04-01  6:11         ` Wen Gong
2019-04-08 10:19         ` Wen Gong
2019-04-08 10:19           ` Wen Gong
2019-04-08 17:27           ` Michał Kazior
2019-04-08 17:27             ` Michał Kazior
2019-04-09  5:09             ` Wen Gong
2019-04-09  5:09               ` Wen Gong
2019-04-09 23:25               ` Brian Norris
2019-04-09 23:25                 ` Brian Norris
2019-04-10  2:45                 ` Wen Gong
2019-04-10  2:45                   ` Wen Gong
2019-05-28  2:49                   ` Wen Gong
2019-05-28  2:49                     ` Wen Gong

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=877eea8kys.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com \
    --to=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=kazikcz@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wgong@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=wgong@qti.qualcomm.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.