From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4244D0EE17 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 16:37:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=8EICz9GuOyoUBn41No93e0bSvSxbKxa69NwvBJHCFQU=; b=gVZVKu8GJgflQGHIZ2jqDRrLUq PO+e0SnfeEn6lZ7LyJSjoEVI2TVCoUI3pt9wHKyytVoHpX0IZK9lYZmjWF+wauWRN9wDtxByXnYc0 1YZgifw+CU/z3HBcG3wLWZvDoIv4p9gPLdTgktvY9fLtYejJKRsQqOKSq1zIMOui3S9T/LUDkvdZI tayIhWeYMblY+sr1Odaf+yUcezvnzv9m8mW422z5WqW4OckURjnhHlHcGOsQkG2ooemjJJ4J64ne+ NyuxHh0G85t2iLpKNJqF09zFQRn2N3GkyJDtSKiAr8vt87KVVbfXlsxmGPhDTCbm7WPphUq/hUwee 8Uv47WGw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1szIdJ-0000000Gz0C-3aLm; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 16:36:53 +0000 Received: from mail-qt1-x82a.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::82a]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1szId0-0000000Gyvc-1F4e for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 16:36:35 +0000 Received: by mail-qt1-x82a.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-45f05f87ca5so13549261cf.2 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 09:36:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1728664592; x=1729269392; darn=lists.infradead.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8EICz9GuOyoUBn41No93e0bSvSxbKxa69NwvBJHCFQU=; b=gncfmIOAGO3wQLA+LFeZm3J7kLkuPJctV8He6aUkB9/har3T8ql7QbNxShaWAixdkG iAgnFSKHzm+KIiu308TVAJHdV4arx9nIKRVo/xYHyj91+zD9XlovRuD0LOgd4qZFpb75 qtUdH0OqiEWcO2NGvcwErBQZ1E9yMrfSVyFh/MPRY1jMFx/UA+EBO29WPkDoZx/b8Unq gkqIWmACt17jWxaqaG3EPgunFRX1VNFW2l+nWgF7HSoZPZdiw/CVAO1tjaBVrUFgmMYV ThJfwyHWaaYD8oIUVuHw2O/AxtPvdckMknimNdqDQ0lk23KamTEArsLW1JTGJ10k5PRa bDCw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1728664592; x=1729269392; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8EICz9GuOyoUBn41No93e0bSvSxbKxa69NwvBJHCFQU=; b=h1qtOmVigiq19ELn30JYFuYaME1Pr3e8jcAGJyMKuoyXph6d+/8ZrmLqeMnxjMX7yW 0M4w6PrzyrJUwo9jqTTZjPaY1LpmOcyNINkFcuwW5wHOWeVDm3tf2S9q0h93AJvGPLLa rIZLZTzHE5lpucU7yMVqEpqUFWJmpL74vE/406yqkAX0gQRcsJ2cES8YljLxy1n6eME8 ccITIBBX98Bp+5qMJFuGJKOstL2O2O61WGp/ai7qcM5iUaOjo8SwmbuD8CxV34RhnObb 9IEp7BhOaTxsQSPBTypbZ8a0Yq+DxQfSLn8VIi4+kgiG2aiG6TgKuVYqQXhUAMFWsb6d Bvlg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWmI8+3X/1fLrWgLmYXkpf2ITM5UiDj+PMSCgC9NC91mu+3VmO1VqVBnqRoA4ogaTpU4xB2QeI=@lists.infradead.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwORZ+L39aLZBiJ1GsfX/7RyWC61q3HT4P1hJjcEFShrFpqgQYe GfvSAxchx92clqIHghXH+CjaeYWoUQhySwBXinjcRSQzZaS/k5mH X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG44fWfmR7QcPGgn1sQ4iDCOvZwINz0uufu8zxEXB5D5LFVJ4ttB1zQ8SXb+8eLL+1E1a9hew== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1f10:b0:458:5716:fbd8 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4604bbcecf9mr54546141cf.32.1728664592363; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 09:36:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.100.121.195] ([152.193.78.90]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d75a77b69052e-46042895a9csm16691971cf.91.2024.10.11.09.36.30 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 11 Oct 2024 09:36:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <7ccfcd67-986b-40a3-8311-73b5335f980c@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 09:36:29 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: failed to remove key (0, ce:ce:1e:27:bb:e0) from hardware (-110) (ETIMEDOUT) To: Paul Menzel Cc: Kalle Valo , Baochen Qiang , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org, LKML References: <8be8619d-f09f-43b2-ada8-2fca2a7d8ea5@gmail.com> <8eda1bd2-88fc-4262-aec0-6f88a73797ef@molgen.mpg.de> Content-Language: en-US From: James Prestwood In-Reply-To: <8eda1bd2-88fc-4262-aec0-6f88a73797ef@molgen.mpg.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20241011_093634_357820_FB971ED4 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 17.81 ) X-BeenThere: ath10k@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+ath10k=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Paul, On 10/11/24 5:48 AM, Paul Menzel wrote: > Dear James, > > > Am 04.09.24 um 16:09 schrieb James Prestwood: > >> On 9/4/24 3:45 AM, Paul Menzel wrote: > >>> Linux 6.11-rc6+ logged the warning below when resuming from ACPI S3 >>> (or unloading and loading the `ath10k_core`/`ath10k_pci` modules) >>> having been connected to an AVM network: >>> >>>     wlp58s0: failed to remove key (0, ce:ce:1e:27:bb:e0) from >>> hardware (-110) >>> >>> Error code 110 is the value for ETIMEDOUT. I saw James patch [1], >>> and applied it, and the error is still there (as expected). >> >> My patch won't actually fix the timeout, I just lowered the time that >> ath10k would wait before it continued which fixed some >> incompatibility on the AP side of things. Based on your logs though, >> it appears you already got disconnected before the failure to remove >> the key... > > I am still applying your patch manually on the current master branch, > and it looks like it hasn’t still been reviewed. Maybe it’s due to the > RFC tag. Do you plan on moving it ahead? There was another thread, which I cant seem to find where Kalle had mentioned the RFC patch. IIRC Kalle had said the proper fix is in the firmware, and would rather not take this patch upstream if we can get the firmware addressed. And I would have to agree this is the best approach if this is an option. This RFC patch was merely a workaround for some odd behavior with Cisco APs that one of our customers was using, where the APs would actually reject roams if they took too long, hence why reducing the timeout "fixed" the problem. Last I checked your situation was different, your device got disconnected _then_ failed to remove the key. If this is the case my RFC patch isn't going to really change much, apart from fail in 1 second vs 3 seconds. Thanks, James > > > Kind regards, > > Paul > > >>> [1]: >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240814164507.996303-1-prestwoj@gmail.com/