From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mout02.posteo.de (mout02.posteo.de [185.67.36.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEE5D4028CA for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2026 09:03:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.67.36.66 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787130193; cv=none; b=W3IHA4NNJUL59TLa00lpo+ar0T8yWMea9RMSoNva/GrU+0dBap2lfF+bAcRz6GPrDfmL68iZP+yUaN69LAs2ROHxoQmgV6DN57KHf+r/VpaLuBLzuqz9BFyupYKva++BQbLVKNp9WTwxlOW7F0UoRy5mJylTv6eJEZxkA1KYQ0Y= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787130193; c=relaxed/simple; bh=V56WzWd2EHf/12E6ECIaHQNoiEpF3J1G/bBOD5bzeTU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Message-ID:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ESl6+MQ1gb42e2v1Cnu89kYV93SyU9ADoyPofLL9kHZDgDKi7K7NwpQP4Up6zTnXSQqKjlA7AHvnLdBvHY/oShBw0HGAwAnWQtGr/mclP+ASBLHh9UcpIj+ibdIZBMUbn7VdXqbLfvBcppnklzMbo9LMjRWW/9b/jWTdpJ/+pps= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=posteo.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=posteo.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=posteo.de header.i=@posteo.de header.b=mF4gVczD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.67.36.66 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=posteo.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=posteo.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=posteo.de header.i=@posteo.de header.b="mF4gVczD" Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8860F240104 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2026 11:03:08 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=posteo.de; s=1984.8680eb; t=1787130188; bh=V56WzWd2EHf/12E6ECIaHQNoiEpF3J1G/bBOD5bzeTU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Message-ID:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:From; b=mF4gVczDmFwyoB6Ak5G9k8Eza7d3mn8ITzzbcuQDDxXegVQI6bxRObsE3TneFQ2ZH hdURX8Cblw9oelo1b7kZnvZ0kA25tlb8Qg++t/hJsFEcUrgf12x06XcpZ9pgmtXXyb jt6fxzZIBMvN3WlfRTeYh8PDMZUs3Ja0jKpW3/9BkXAVXUrjy7ygeuHrpKFFK8pyJP 2cThQDOmEFInzlw/XL6dsuKbtNPD1Ta9j/1xgnIc4Us8PnPszVN5NIF/3l50fqv2x3 3fXET8hT803bPpfShLW/5T2mmFJdRamyc7I3JuSg4JCDulHe3y2IJojYdAJjEFaaEk JlWSqeNMcjcGg== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4hQ0wB6xF9z9rxF; Wed, 19 Aug 2026 11:03:06 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 09:03:08 +0000 From: Jonas Hort To: Devin Wittmayer Cc: Thorsten Leemhuis , regressions@lists.linux.dev, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Felix Fietkau , lorenzo.bianconi83@gmail.com Message-ID: <49643be3-43e5-41f8-9ed7-689269adc7d4@posteo.de> Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] mt7925: MLO connectivity silently stalls with 6GHz link active Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Correlation-ID: <49643be3-43e5-41f8-9ed7-689269adc7d4@posteo.de> Thanks for the detailed breakdown. I'll build v7.0 vanilla and test it, as suggested. Fair warning though: I'm on vacation this week, so I'll pick this up next week. I've also never compiled a kernel before, so it'll likely take me a bit of trial and error the first time around - please bear with me if it takes a little longer than expected. Will report back once I have results. Thanks again, Jonas 19.08.2026 03:18:34 Devin Wittmayer : > Thank you very much, that answers both things. >=20 > The ROC tracing is the more useful of the two even though it came back > negative. Two of the three freezes have no ROC activity in them at all, s= o a > link switch that never finished cannot be what starts this. The middle on= e > does have rocabort, mloroc and rocwork in it, but one out of three makes > that look like the exception rather than the pattern. So the area I sent = you > looking at is out, and that is worth knowing before you spend nights on > builds. >=20 > One other thing worth saying first. There is a five patch mt76 series on = the > list at the moment and two of the patches look like they were written for > exactly this bug. I do not think they were, and it is your own numbers th= at > show it. The failure 4/5 fixes stops mt76_txq_schedule_list from servicin= g > the queue, and the one 5/5 fixes stops mt76_txq_send_burst once the non-A= QL > count reaches its cap. Both of those keep frames from ever reaching the > hardware, so if either were your problem head would be sitting still > alongside tail. Yours does the opposite. Head climbs 390 to 408 while tai= l > stays at 260, so the frames are getting into the ring and nothing is > finishing them, which is the far end of the same path. 2/5 is a use after > free when an interface goes away, so it does not fit either. I would not > expect that series to change what you see. >=20 > On the bisect I would build v7.0 next. There are 32 mt7925 commits betwee= n > 7.0 and 7.1 and 19 of them are one run of work from Sean Wang, reworking = how > the driver tracks the per link mlink and WCID for an MLO station. That is > the kind of change that fits a bug only showing up with two links up. If > v7.0 comes back clean, that series is where I would look. If v7.0 is alre= ady > broken then it is off the hook and 6.19 becomes the next split. The mt76 > core and mac80211 both moved in the same window, so mt7925 is where I wou= ld > look first rather than the only place worth looking. >=20 > Devin >=20 > Am 17.08.26 um 23:34 schrieb Jonas Hort: >=20 >> Quick follow-up: managed to confirm 6.18 as a clean baseline on my >> own hardware now (not just secondhand from others in the forum >> thread) - running Linux 6.18.42-1-cachyos-lts with MLO active >> (5GHz+6GHz, same FritzBox 5690 Pro) for 3 hours straight, no freeze >> at all. >=20 > Am 17.08.26 um 16:25 schrieb Jonas Hort: >=20 >> One correction to how I described this earlier: the connection does >> NOT reliably self-heal on its own. I have manually intervened every >> single time to restore connectivity [...] >>=20 >> Update on the ROC tracing: three real freezes captured now with the >> kprobes active (all confirmed via the WFDMA0 tail-frozen signature). >>=20 >> - Freeze #1 (15:37): no ROC activity in the trace. >> - Freeze #2 (15:43): [...] The trace shows several ROC events >> =C2=A0 (rocabort, mloroc, rocwork) clustered together. >> - Freeze #3 (16:15): no ROC activity again. >>=20 >> Uploaded all three logs to the bugzilla ticket if useful: >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D221884