Re: [PATCH 4/8] wifi: mt76: mt7996: switch to mcu command for TX GI report

[Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>]

On 12/7/23 09:07, shayne.chen@mediatek.com wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-12-04 at 13:57 -0800, Ben Greear wrote:
>>   	
>> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
>> you have verified the sender or the content.
>>   On 11/2/23 03:02, Shayne Chen wrote:
>>> From: Benjamin Lin <benjamin-jw.lin@mediatek.com>
>>>
>>> During runtime, the GI value in the WTBL is not updated in real-
>> time. To
>>> obtain the latest results for the TX GI, switch to use an MCU
>> command.
>>
>> Hello,
> 
> Hi Ben,
>>
>> I do not see this callback happening on my system.  What firmware
>> version
>> is needed for this to work?
>>
>> And where to find it...
>>
> 
> Please get testing firmware files from the following link to see if it
> works on your environment:
> https://github.com/csyuanc/linux-firmware

I do see the callback happening with that latest firmware, thanks for the link to that.

tx_gi is always reported at zero though, which seems unlikely to be correct.

[  625.875443] mt7996e 0000:0d:00.0: ERROR: MCU:  Sequence mismatch in response, seq: 13  rxd->seq: 12 cmd: 130022
[  625.988751] update-tx-gi, mode: 8  tx_gi: 0
[  625.988755] update-tx-gi, mode: 0  tx_gi: 0
[  626.091378] mt7996e 0000:0d:00.0: ERROR: MCU:  Sequence mismatch in response, seq: 1  rxd->seq: 15 cmd: 130022
[  626.204917] update-tx-gi, mode: 8  tx_gi: 0
[  626.204920] update-tx-gi, mode: 0  tx_gi: 0
[  626.307376] mt7996e 0000:0d:00.0: ERROR: MCU:  Sequence mismatch in response, seq: 4  rxd->seq: 3 cmd: 130022
[  626.421332] update-tx-gi, mode: 8  tx_gi: 0
[  626.421335] update-tx-gi, mode: 0  tx_gi: 0
[  626.523436] mt7996e 0000:0d:00.0: ERROR: MCU:  Sequence mismatch in response, seq: 7  rxd->seq: 6 cmd: 130022
[  626.636900] update-tx-gi, mode: 8  tx_gi: 0
[  626.636904] update-tx-gi, mode: 0  tx_gi: 0
[  626.739408] mt7996e 0000:0d:00.0: ERROR: MCU:  Sequence mismatch in response, seq: 10  rxd->seq: 9 cmd: 130022
[  626.852727] update-tx-gi, mode: 8  tx_gi: 0
[  626.852731] update-tx-gi, mode: 0  tx_gi: 0
[  626.955475] mt7996e 0000:0d:00.0: ERROR: MCU:  Sequence mismatch in response, seq: 13  rxd->seq: 12 cmd: 130022


diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt7996/mcu.c b/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt7996/mcu.c
index 407894c13d91..8aad38a21cd4 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt7996/mcu.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt7996/mcu.c
@@ -534,6 +534,9 @@ mt7996_mcu_ie_countdown(struct mt7996_dev *dev, struct sk_buff *skb)
  static int
  mt7996_mcu_update_tx_gi(struct rate_info *rate, struct all_sta_trx_rate *mcu_rate)
  {
+       pr_info("update-tx-gi, mode: %d  tx_gi: %d\n",
+               mcu_rate->tx_mode, mcu_rate->tx_gi);
+
         switch (mcu_rate->tx_mode) {
         case MT_PHY_TYPE_CCK:
         case MT_PHY_TYPE_OFDM:
[greearb@ben-dt5 mediatek]$


And lots of seq mismatch warnings in this firmware...could that be because of the new guard-interval
callback perhaps?  Do the messages sent from FW increment the seq number?  The parse-response code appears
to assume that it's responses are the only thing that would increment the seq number...

Here's my code to debug the seq mismatch:

static int
mt7996_mcu_parse_response(struct mt76_dev *mdev, int cmd,
			  struct sk_buff *skb, int seq)
{
	struct mt7996_mcu_rxd *rxd;
	struct mt7996_mcu_uni_event *event;
	int mcu_cmd = FIELD_GET(__MCU_CMD_FIELD_ID, cmd);
	int ret = 0;

	if (!skb) {
		const char* first = "Secondary";

		mdev->mcu_timeouts++;
		if (!mdev->first_failed_mcu_cmd)
			first = "Initial";

		dev_err(mdev->dev, "MCU: %s Failure: Message %08x (cid %lx ext_cid: %lx seq %d) timeout (%d/%d).  Last successful cmd: 0x%x\n",
			first,
			cmd, FIELD_GET(__MCU_CMD_FIELD_ID, cmd),
			FIELD_GET(__MCU_CMD_FIELD_EXT_ID, cmd), seq,
			mdev->mcu_timeouts, MAX_MCU_TIMEOUTS,
			mdev->last_successful_mcu_cmd);

		if (!mdev->first_failed_mcu_cmd)
			mdev->first_failed_mcu_cmd = cmd;
		return -ETIMEDOUT;
	}

	mdev->mcu_timeouts = 0;
	mdev->last_successful_mcu_cmd = cmd;

	if (mdev->first_failed_mcu_cmd) {
		dev_err(mdev->dev, "MCU: First success after failure: Message %08x (cid %lx ext_cid: %lx seq %d)\n",
			cmd, FIELD_GET(__MCU_CMD_FIELD_ID, cmd),
			FIELD_GET(__MCU_CMD_FIELD_EXT_ID, cmd), seq);
		mdev->first_failed_mcu_cmd = 0;
	} else {
		/* verbose debugging
		   dev_err(mdev->dev, "MCU: OK response to message %08x (cid %lx ext_cid: %lx seq %d)\n",
		           cmd, FIELD_GET(__MCU_CMD_FIELD_ID, cmd),
		           FIELD_GET(__MCU_CMD_FIELD_EXT_ID, cmd), seq);
		*/
	}

	rxd = (struct mt7996_mcu_rxd *)skb->data;
	if (seq != rxd->seq) {
		dev_err(mdev->dev, "ERROR: MCU:  Sequence mismatch in response, seq: %d  rxd->seq: %d cmd: %0x\n",
			seq, rxd->seq, cmd);
		return -EAGAIN;
	}

	if (cmd == MCU_CMD(PATCH_SEM_CONTROL)) {
		skb_pull(skb, sizeof(*rxd) - 4);
		ret = *skb->data;
	} else if ((rxd->option & MCU_UNI_CMD_EVENT) &&
		    rxd->eid == MCU_UNI_EVENT_RESULT) {
		skb_pull(skb, sizeof(*rxd));
		event = (struct mt7996_mcu_uni_event *)skb->data;
		ret = le32_to_cpu(event->status);
		/* skip invalid event */
		if (mcu_cmd != event->cid)
			ret = -EAGAIN;
	} else {
		skb_pull(skb, sizeof(struct mt7996_mcu_rxd));
	}

	return ret;
}

Thanks,
Ben


-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com