Re: usb HC busted?

[Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 12:59:48PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> Hi Mathias,
> 
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 05:15:00PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > Hi Mathias,
> > 
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 02:01:30PM +0300, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> > > On 21.06.2018 03:53, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > > Hi Mathias, Andy,
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 10:40:03AM +0300, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> > > > > On 06.06.2018 19:45, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> <snip>
> > > 
> > > Can you share a bit more details on the platform you are using, and what types of test you are running.
> > 
> > Sorry for the delayed reply, I was in Tokyo for the OSS.
> > 
> > It is a board based on "Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU  E3840  @ 1.91GHz".
> > The usb device in question is a bluetooth device:
> > 
> > Bus 001 Device 012: ID 8087:07dc Intel Corp.
> <snip>
> > 
> > And the problem that we are seeing is with phone calls via bluetooth.
> > 
> > > Does my test above trigger the case? (show "MATTU dmatest match!")
> > 
> > I have kept it for tonight, will see the results tomorrow morning.
> > And I am using that same device in the usb script to change "authrized".
> 
> No, your test did not trigger the error. :(
> 
> But, my last night's test (with an added debug to get some extra trace for addresses) showed the same error of -
> "Looking for event-dma", but looking at the ftrace, I could not see it getting same address from dma_pool_zalloc().
> 
> Can you please have a look at the dmesg and ftrace at:
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1nMy_qVxOQzcZNYa9bw7az9WiS2MZzdKo

And to add to my previous mail, in another cycle where I do see the
same problem and my extra debugs give the following:

           <...>-23974 [002] ....   495.991276: xhci_ring_mem_detail: MATTU xhci_segment_alloc dma @ 0x000000002d21c000
           <...>-23974 [002] ....   495.991285: xhci_ring_mem_detail: SUDIP page details dma=0x000000002d21c000, vaddr=ed21c000, inuse=1, offset=0
           <...>-23974 [002] ....   495.991289: xhci_ring_mem_detail: MATTU xhci_segment_alloc dma @ 0x000000002d21c000
           <...>-23974 [002] ....   495.991292: xhci_ring_mem_detail: SUDIP page details dma=0x000000002d21c000, vaddr=ed21c000, inuse=2, offset=0
           <...>-23974 [002] ....   495.991295: xhci_ring_alloc: ISOC f0b62900: enq 0x000000002d21c000(0x000000002d21c000) deq 0x000000002d21c000(0x000000002d21c000) segs 2 stream 0 free_trbs 509 bounce 17 cycle 1
           <...>-23974 [002] ....   495.991298: xhci_ring_mem_detail: MATTU xhci_segment_alloc dma @ 0x000000002d21c000
           <...>-23974 [002] ....   495.991301: xhci_ring_mem_detail: SUDIP page details dma=0x000000002d21c000, vaddr=ed21c000, inuse=3, offset=0
           <...>-23974 [002] ....   495.991304: xhci_ring_mem_detail: MATTU xhci_segment_alloc dma @ 0x000000002d21c000
           <...>-23974 [002] ....   495.991306: xhci_ring_mem_detail: SUDIP page details dma=0x000000002d21c000, vaddr=ed21c000, inuse=4, offset=0


I am totally lost now. Are we looking at two different issues?
This log shows same addresses, my previous mail and log did not show
the same addresses. :(


--
Regards
Sudip