From: Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi>
To: Chris Rorvick <chris@rorvick.com>,
Intel Linux Wireless <linuxwifi@intel.com>,
Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
Oren Givon <oren.givon@intel.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: pcie: reduce "unsupported splx" to a warning
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 17:02:44 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1476108164.5210.11.camel@coelho.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161010071943.4717-1-chris@rorvick.com>
Hi,
On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 02:19 -0500, Chris Rorvick wrote:
> Commit bcb079a14d75 ("iwlwifi: pcie: retrieve and parse ACPI power
> limitations") looks for a specific structure in the ACPI tables for
> setting the default power limit. The data returned for at least some
> dual band chipsets is not recognized, though. For example, the AC 8260
> reports the following:
This is not coming from the NIC itself, but from the platform's ACPI
tables. Can you tell us which platform you are using?
> Name (SPLX, Package (0x04)
> {
> Zero,
> Package (0x03)
> {
> 0,
> 1200,
> 1000
> },
> Package (0x03)
> {
> 0,
> 1200,
> 1000
> },
> Package (0x03)
> {
> 0,
> 1200,
> 1000
> }
> })
This is not the structure that we are expecting. We expect this:
Name (SPLX, Package (0x02)
{
Zero,
Package (0x03)
{
0x07,
<value>,
<value>
}
})
...as you correctly pointed out. The data in the structure you have is
not for WiFi (actually I don't think 0 is a valid value, but I'll
double-check).
> The current logic expects exactly two elements in the outer package,
> causing the above to be ignored and the power limit unset.
>
> Despite the interface being fully functional after initialization, the
> above condition is reported as an error. Knock the message down to a
> warning and provide better context for understanding its consequence.
Reducing this to a warning is an easy way to reduce the verbosity of
the problem, but I think the correct thing to do would be to accept
multiple entries and ignore the ones that don't have the WIFI marker.
And only type-check the WIFI ones.
There are other things that look a bit inconsistent in this code...
I'll try to find the official ACPI table definitions for this entries
to make sure it's correct.
> Signed-off-by: Chris Rorvick <chris@rorvick.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/drv.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/drv.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/drv.c
> index 78cf9a7..19b531f 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/drv.c
> @@ -540,7 +540,7 @@ static u64 splx_get_pwr_limit(struct iwl_trans *trans, union acpi_object *splx)
> splx->package.count != 2 ||
> splx->package.elements[0].type != ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER ||
> splx->package.elements[0].integer.value != 0) {
> - IWL_ERR(trans, "Unsupported splx structure\n");
> + IWL_WARN(trans, "Unsupported splx structure, not limiting WiFi power\n");
> return 0;
> }
If this is really bothering you, I guess I could apply this patch for
now. But as I said, this is not solving the actual problem.
--
Cheers,
Luca.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-10 14:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-10 7:19 [PATCH] iwlwifi: pcie: reduce "unsupported splx" to a warning Chris Rorvick
2016-10-10 14:02 ` Luca Coelho [this message]
2016-10-11 10:11 ` Paul Bolle
2016-10-11 14:09 ` Chris Rorvick
2016-10-11 14:27 ` Chris Rorvick
2016-10-12 6:25 ` Luca Coelho
2016-10-12 4:32 ` Chris Rorvick
2016-10-12 12:24 ` Luca Coelho
2016-10-12 12:36 ` Paul Bolle
2016-10-12 13:06 ` Luca Coelho
2016-10-12 6:11 ` Luca Coelho
2016-10-12 6:52 ` Paul Bolle
2016-10-12 17:50 ` Chris Rorvick
2016-10-12 18:05 ` Paul Bolle
2016-10-12 18:36 ` Chris Rorvick
2016-10-13 9:01 ` Luca Coelho
2016-10-13 10:21 ` [PATCH] iwlwifi: pcie: fix SPLC structure parsing Luca Coelho
2016-10-13 11:27 ` Paul Bolle
2016-10-13 11:30 ` Luca Coelho
2016-10-13 12:36 ` Paul Bolle
2016-10-13 12:44 ` Luca Coelho
2016-10-13 12:55 ` Paul Bolle
2016-10-13 17:49 ` Luca Coelho
2016-10-13 13:56 ` Chris Rorvick
2016-10-13 14:30 ` Luca Coelho
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=1476108164.5210.11.camel@coelho.fi \
--to=luca@coelho.fi \
--cc=chris@rorvick.com \
--cc=emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com \
--cc=johannes.berg@intel.com \
--cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxwifi@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oren.givon@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).