Re: [2/2] mwifiex: use more_rx_task_flag to avoid USB RX stall

[Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>]

Ganapathi Bhat <gbhat@marvell.com> wrote:

> From: Shrenik Shikhare <shrenik@marvell.com>
> 
> There is a race condition for acquiring rx_proc_lock between
> rx worker thread and USB RX data interrupt
> (mwifiex_usb_rx_complete):
> 
> 1. USB receives an RX data interrupt, queues rx_work
> 2. rx_work empties rx_data_q, tries to acquire rx_proc_lock (to
> clear rx_processing flag)
> 3. While #2 is yet to acquire rx_proc_lock, driver receives
> continuous RX data interupts(mwifiex_usb_rx_complete)
> 3. For each interrupt at #3, driver acquires rx_proc_lock(it gets
> the lock since it is in interrupt context), tries to queue
> rx_work, but fails to do so since rx_processing is still set(#2)
> 4. When rx_pending exceeds HIGH_RX_PENDING, driver stops
> submitting URBs back to USB subsystem and thus firmware stops
> uploading RX data to driver
> 5. Now finally #2 will acquire rx_proc_lock, but because of #4,
> there are no further triggers to schedule rx_work again
> 
> The above scenario occurs in some platforms where the RX
> processing is comparitively slower. This results in RX stall in
> driver, command/TX timeouts in firmware. The above scenario is
> introduced after commit c7dbdcb2a4e1
> ("mwifiex: schedule rx_work on RX interrupt for USB")
> 
> To fix this set a new more_rx_task_flag whenever RX data callback
> is trying to schedule rx_work but rx_processing is not yet
> cleared. This will let the current rx_work(which was waiting for
> rx_proc_lock) to loopback and process newly arrived RX packets.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Cathy Luo <cluo@marvell.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ganapathi Bhat <gbhat@marvell.com>

I can't find any commit with id c7dbdcb2a4e1, is it correct?

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10178729/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches