Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: recalculate average tpt if not current

Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: recalculate average tpt if not current

[Nils Radtke]

  Hi John,

http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=127317062320707&w=2 :
> > > The BUG_ON was introduced by:
> > > commit 3110bef78cb4282c58245bc8fd6d95d9ccb19749
> > > Author: Guy Cohen <guy.cohen@intel.com>
> > > Date:   Tue Sep 9 10:54:54 2008 +0800
> > > 
> > >     iwlwifi: Added support for 3 antennas
> > > 
> > > ... the portion adding the BUG_ON is reverted since we are encountering the error
> > > and BUG_ON was created with assumption that error is not encountered.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > 
> > I noticed this patch in your wireless-next-2.6 pull request. Since it is
> > addressing a system hang issue, could it perhaps be included in
> > wireless-2.6 also? I should have included the bug report reference for
> > this purpose, sorry ... it is
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588021
> 
> I didn't send it that way because a) that code has been there for a
> really long time; and b) the reporter couldn't reliably reproduce
> the bug and therefore can't reliably test the fix.  While I agree
> that the fix looks harmless, no update is zero-risk.
> 
> Can you reliably hit that code?  Has it been tested enough that we
> should risk holding-up 2.6.34's release for it?
I'm one of those _very reliably_ hitting this BUG. I can tell how 
annoying it is. I have to backport the patch w/ every kernel release
to be able to use the wireless link _at all_. So please consider
it as somewhat urgent to get the patch included. 

I'm still in contact w/ Reinette regularly to get those problems fixed.
It involves physically moving around the city for testing any modification
so this working is slowly processing as it takes every time an enormous 
amount of time to do so. Work in (slow) progress, but it's alive..
C.f. http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/992941

BTW, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588021 this isn't fixed.
Maybe RH did fix it. kernel.org sources haven't. This is a blocker ever 
since.

  Cheers,

      Nils

Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: recalculate average tpt if not current

[John W. Linville]

On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 06:32:18PM +0200, Nils Radtke wrote:
>   Hi John,
> 
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=127317062320707&w=2 :
> > > > The BUG_ON was introduced by:
> > > > commit 3110bef78cb4282c58245bc8fd6d95d9ccb19749
> > > > Author: Guy Cohen <guy.cohen@intel.com>
> > > > Date:   Tue Sep 9 10:54:54 2008 +0800
> > > > 
> > > >     iwlwifi: Added support for 3 antennas
> > > > 
> > > > ... the portion adding the BUG_ON is reverted since we are encountering the error
> > > > and BUG_ON was created with assumption that error is not encountered.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > I noticed this patch in your wireless-next-2.6 pull request. Since it is
> > > addressing a system hang issue, could it perhaps be included in
> > > wireless-2.6 also? I should have included the bug report reference for
> > > this purpose, sorry ... it is
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588021
> > 
> > I didn't send it that way because a) that code has been there for a
> > really long time; and b) the reporter couldn't reliably reproduce
> > the bug and therefore can't reliably test the fix.  While I agree
> > that the fix looks harmless, no update is zero-risk.
> > 
> > Can you reliably hit that code?  Has it been tested enough that we
> > should risk holding-up 2.6.34's release for it?
> I'm one of those _very reliably_ hitting this BUG. I can tell how 
> annoying it is. I have to backport the patch w/ every kernel release
> to be able to use the wireless link _at all_. So please consider
> it as somewhat urgent to get the patch included. 
> 
> I'm still in contact w/ Reinette regularly to get those problems fixed.
> It involves physically moving around the city for testing any modification
> so this working is slowly processing as it takes every time an enormous 
> amount of time to do so. Work in (slow) progress, but it's alive..
> C.f. http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/992941
> 
> BTW, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588021 this isn't fixed.
> Maybe RH did fix it. kernel.org sources haven't. This is a blocker ever 
> since.

The patch is in linux-2.6.  I suppose it could go to stable@kernel.org.

commit 3d79b2a9eeaa066b35c49fbb17e3156a3c482c3e
Author: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Date:   Mon May 3 10:55:07 2010 -0700

    iwlwifi: recalculate average tpt if not current
    
    We currently have this check as a BUG_ON, which is being hit by people.
    Previously it was an error with a recalculation if not current, return that
    code.
    
    The BUG_ON was introduced by:
    commit 3110bef78cb4282c58245bc8fd6d95d9ccb19749
    Author: Guy Cohen <guy.cohen@intel.com>
    Date:   Tue Sep 9 10:54:54 2008 +0800
    
        iwlwifi: Added support for 3 antennas
    
    ... the portion adding the BUG_ON is reverted since we are encountering the 
    and BUG_ON was created with assumption that error is not encountered.
    
    Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
    Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>

-- 
John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com			might be all we have.  Be ready.

Re: [stable] [PATCH] iwlwifi: recalculate average tpt if not current

[Greg KH]

On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 02:03:28PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 06:32:18PM +0200, Nils Radtke wrote:
> >   Hi John,
> > 
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=127317062320707&w=2 :
> > > > > The BUG_ON was introduced by:
> > > > > commit 3110bef78cb4282c58245bc8fd6d95d9ccb19749
> > > > > Author: Guy Cohen <guy.cohen@intel.com>
> > > > > Date:   Tue Sep 9 10:54:54 2008 +0800
> > > > > 
> > > > >     iwlwifi: Added support for 3 antennas
> > > > > 
> > > > > ... the portion adding the BUG_ON is reverted since we are encountering the error
> > > > > and BUG_ON was created with assumption that error is not encountered.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > I noticed this patch in your wireless-next-2.6 pull request. Since it is
> > > > addressing a system hang issue, could it perhaps be included in
> > > > wireless-2.6 also? I should have included the bug report reference for
> > > > this purpose, sorry ... it is
> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588021
> > > 
> > > I didn't send it that way because a) that code has been there for a
> > > really long time; and b) the reporter couldn't reliably reproduce
> > > the bug and therefore can't reliably test the fix.  While I agree
> > > that the fix looks harmless, no update is zero-risk.
> > > 
> > > Can you reliably hit that code?  Has it been tested enough that we
> > > should risk holding-up 2.6.34's release for it?
> > I'm one of those _very reliably_ hitting this BUG. I can tell how 
> > annoying it is. I have to backport the patch w/ every kernel release
> > to be able to use the wireless link _at all_. So please consider
> > it as somewhat urgent to get the patch included. 
> > 
> > I'm still in contact w/ Reinette regularly to get those problems fixed.
> > It involves physically moving around the city for testing any modification
> > so this working is slowly processing as it takes every time an enormous 
> > amount of time to do so. Work in (slow) progress, but it's alive..
> > C.f. http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/992941
> > 
> > BTW, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588021 this isn't fixed.
> > Maybe RH did fix it. kernel.org sources haven't. This is a blocker ever 
> > since.
> 
> The patch is in linux-2.6.  I suppose it could go to stable@kernel.org.

Now queued up, thanks.

greg k-h

[PATCH] iwlagn: Change the TPT calculations sanity-check to WARN_ON

[John W. Linville]

From: Adel Gadllah <adel.gadllah@gmail.com>

Currently it is a BUG_ON() which will hang the machine once triggered.

(Changed from WARN_ON to WARN_ON_ONCE. -- JWL)

Signed-off-by: Adel Gadllah <adel.gadllah@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c |    5 +++--
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c
index 8f8d5e3..ca63ff9 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c
@@ -2079,8 +2079,9 @@ static void rs_rate_scale_perform(struct iwl_priv *priv,
 	 * actual average throughput */
 
 	/* Sanity-check TPT calculations */
-	BUG_ON(window->average_tpt != ((window->success_ratio *
-			tbl->expected_tpt[index] + 64) / 128));
+	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(window->average_tpt != ((window->success_ratio *
+				tbl->expected_tpt[index] + 64) / 128)))
+		return;
 
 	/* If we are searching for better modulation mode, check success. */
 	if (lq_sta->search_better_tbl &&
-- 
1.6.6.1

Re: [PATCH] iwlagn: Change the TPT calculations sanity-check to WARN_ON

[reinette chatre]

On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 10:25 -0700, John W. Linville wrote:
> From: Adel Gadllah <adel.gadllah@gmail.com>
> 
> Currently it is a BUG_ON() which will hang the machine once triggered.
> 
> (Changed from WARN_ON to WARN_ON_ONCE. -- JWL)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Adel Gadllah <adel.gadllah@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>

I can see a potential race condition here in the calculation of the
average throughput so a BUG_ON seems extreme.

I looked at the history of this code and it seems as though the BUG_ON was
added as a sidenote to a patch implementing something else. 

The patch adding this BUG_ON is:

commit 3110bef78cb4282c58245bc8fd6d95d9ccb19749
Author: Guy Cohen <guy.cohen@intel.com>
Date:   Tue Sep 9 10:54:54 2008 +0800

    iwlwifi: Added support for 3 antennas


... and it thus seems as though this BUG_ON was added along the way while doing
something else ... especially considering that the comments describing the
original code has not been removed yet. Since the current code still contains:

        /* Else we have enough samples; calculate estimate of
         * actual average throughput */

.. .which is obviously not done right now.

I looked at the original code and think we can revert the portion of this patch
adding the BUG_ON. Since users have not encountered the error I assume the
author considered that a BUG_ON was warranted, but now we know that users do
indeed encounter the error and we should return the original code.

I'll send the revert as a separate patch.

Reinette

[PATCH] iwlwifi: recalculate average tpt if not current

[reinette chatre]

From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>

We currently have this check as a BUG_ON, which is being hit by people.
Previously it was an error with a recalculation if not current, return that
code.

The BUG_ON was introduced by:
commit 3110bef78cb4282c58245bc8fd6d95d9ccb19749
Author: Guy Cohen <guy.cohen@intel.com>
Date:   Tue Sep 9 10:54:54 2008 +0800

    iwlwifi: Added support for 3 antennas

... the portion adding the BUG_ON is reverted since we are encountering the error
and BUG_ON was created with assumption that error is not encountered.

Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
---

 drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c |   10 ++++++----
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c
index b93e491..75a145c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c
@@ -2070,10 +2070,12 @@ static void rs_rate_scale_perform(struct iwl_priv *priv,
 	}
 	/* Else we have enough samples; calculate estimate of
 	 * actual average throughput */
-
-	/* Sanity-check TPT calculations */
-	BUG_ON(window->average_tpt != ((window->success_ratio *
-			tbl->expected_tpt[index] + 64) / 128));
+	if (window->average_tpt != ((window->success_ratio *
+			tbl->expected_tpt[index] + 64) / 128)) {
+		IWL_ERR(priv, "expected_tpt should have been calculated by now\n");
+		window->average_tpt = ((window->success_ratio *
+					tbl->expected_tpt[index] + 64) / 128);
+	}
 
 	/* If we are searching for better modulation mode, check success. */
 	if (lq_sta->search_better_tbl &&
-- 
1.6.3.3

Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: recalculate average tpt if not current

[reinette chatre]

Hi John,

On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 10:55 -0700, reinette chatre wrote:
> From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
> 
> We currently have this check as a BUG_ON, which is being hit by people.
> Previously it was an error with a recalculation if not current, return that
> code.
> 
> The BUG_ON was introduced by:
> commit 3110bef78cb4282c58245bc8fd6d95d9ccb19749
> Author: Guy Cohen <guy.cohen@intel.com>
> Date:   Tue Sep 9 10:54:54 2008 +0800
> 
>     iwlwifi: Added support for 3 antennas
> 
> ... the portion adding the BUG_ON is reverted since we are encountering the error
> and BUG_ON was created with assumption that error is not encountered.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
> ---

I noticed this patch in your wireless-next-2.6 pull request. Since it is
addressing a system hang issue, could it perhaps be included in
wireless-2.6 also? I should have included the bug report reference for
this purpose, sorry ... it is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588021

Reinette

Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: recalculate average tpt if not current

[John W. Linville]

On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 09:11:08AM -0700, reinette chatre wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 10:55 -0700, reinette chatre wrote:
> > From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
> > 
> > We currently have this check as a BUG_ON, which is being hit by people.
> > Previously it was an error with a recalculation if not current, return that
> > code.
> > 
> > The BUG_ON was introduced by:
> > commit 3110bef78cb4282c58245bc8fd6d95d9ccb19749
> > Author: Guy Cohen <guy.cohen@intel.com>
> > Date:   Tue Sep 9 10:54:54 2008 +0800
> > 
> >     iwlwifi: Added support for 3 antennas
> > 
> > ... the portion adding the BUG_ON is reverted since we are encountering the error
> > and BUG_ON was created with assumption that error is not encountered.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
> > ---
> 
> I noticed this patch in your wireless-next-2.6 pull request. Since it is
> addressing a system hang issue, could it perhaps be included in
> wireless-2.6 also? I should have included the bug report reference for
> this purpose, sorry ... it is
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588021

I didn't send it that way because a) that code has been there for a
really long time; and b) the reporter couldn't reliably reproduce
the bug and therefore can't reliably test the fix.  While I agree
that the fix looks harmless, no update is zero-risk.

Can you reliably hit that code?  Has it been tested enough that we
should risk holding-up 2.6.34's release for it?

John
-- 
John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com			might be all we have.  Be ready.

Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: recalculate average tpt if not current

[reinette chatre]

Hi John,

On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 11:22 -0700, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 09:11:08AM -0700, reinette chatre wrote:
> > I noticed this patch in your wireless-next-2.6 pull request. Since it is
> > addressing a system hang issue, could it perhaps be included in
> > wireless-2.6 also? I should have included the bug report reference for
> > this purpose, sorry ... it is
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588021
> 
> I didn't send it that way because a) that code has been there for a
> really long time; and b) the reporter couldn't reliably reproduce
> the bug and therefore can't reliably test the fix.  While I agree
> that the fix looks harmless, no update is zero-risk.
> 
> Can you reliably hit that code?  Has it been tested enough that we
> should risk holding-up 2.6.34's release for it?

Good point ... we have not seen this BUG being hit before and it seems
to have been there since 2.6.28.  In addition to the report in RedHat
bugzilla there is a lkml thread that seems to be related to this code
also (http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/5/3/229 ) ... but that reporter did not
seem to test this patch and my last reply to that thread bounced to his
email address.

We thus seem to have two recent reports of users hitting the BUG, which
may mean some other recent change in driver causes this BUG to be hit,
not really just the presence of the BUG code itself.

As far as testing goes ... this patch has just been merged and will from
now on be included in our regression testing. Unfortunately this had not
been exercised much yet since I just merged.

I guess we will proceed with the "wait and see" here and forward this
patch to stable if the BUG is encountered again.

Reinette