Re: [PATCH] ath10k: Wait until copy complete is actually done before completing

Doug Anderson
2020-06-15T14:39:49Z

Hi,

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 7:32 AM Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
> Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> 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 <dianders@chromium.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
>
> ath10k firmwares work very differently, on what hardware and firmware did you
> test this? I'll add that information to the commit log.

I am running on a Qualcomm sc7180 SoC.

> --
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11595887/
>
> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
>