From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (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 EDB163AE194; Mon, 7 Sep 2026 06:31:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788762674; cv=none; b=b9ZmUBE9IaoRp3/tve9uouRBU9D6p96VFRRlufXLcjHHuzR+8KroZdHyOMEOTJa0zcRkf1h2k9Yky5VAZmvNYtZHCgcpP8gIS1Y8ucKmOQJy1T1sehtD6df4jY8o58RJ0Ts0mvg00dLyhxZlAgemlvkLQHr//frCnOQCIwdQW5s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788762674; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oPI5dlqcbplDbVLpYxfwS1vk1MKfBLp2yvJkz6prFSw=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=tx0ZUGksADyZ8NRdgDY525zqImTBFJtP2y14NHDaPlMwWSKStS9UL+nwFCb5kOSdw9fRXqLxrVIM29girUyfmA27rbw5LsaoJkSysDi7V8JQc8bKlQvyJwcIZ6P+FWbQggXUpiLTa4D8NPWxFrB/sfLD3nLORE0SNhhRyAS02VA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=permerror header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=AY7UuHC5; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=permerror header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="AY7UuHC5" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=oPI5dlqcbplDbVLpYxfwS1vk1MKfBLp2yvJkz6prFSw=; t=1788762670; x=1789972270; b=AY7UuHC5/asf4vI/UHKyJhKE04Zwy4dwqRBK7lFlOWR23wQ eiSezzNSz3yrAKerJygKANasaMDc23TjRvG5LT8IeXsjhfwZiY520k+cogjj/RDTTdImOsNyvsig3 BswXP8dvmh2gb18RDIZ54/Og/mOxmbBs+2rym1q+KW/wRy+9+o6bY7BDY5tuR1q+xkdeGaLNXk33q j42YiX+TCYXj+b284j9i3OgAbftLQHkWOx+EK6PPva+FgnEfqDSyoCZBU/AdSW+cdf1+XUK7knerp b7FT1Nmmk8ee8OFroRMr+y+5J7/pwsv2twGQAQe4vgu7Q+ZjBjD52Lk7OhytbYkA==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__ECDSA_SECP256R1_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1x3Sse-00000004Jzo-36An; Mon, 07 Sep 2026 08:31:01 +0200 Message-ID: <60a8acf1adc0d2acc5c558c4cc791d01421f6b92.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH wireless v2 1/3] wifi: iwlwifi: pcie: don't infer CSME presence from a failed read From: Johannes Berg To: Navon John Lukose , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Miri Korenblit Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Emmanuel Grumbach , Nika Krasnova , Mark Pearson , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2026 08:30:59 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20260906230022.148733-1-navonjohnlukose@gmail.com> (sfid-20260907_010041_495523_B0CD5EA1) References: <20260831130332.323549-1-navonjohnlukose@gmail.com> <20260831130332.323549-2-navonjohnlukose@gmail.com> <20260901154828.GA1879052@bhelgaas> <20260901161736.GA1883420@bhelgaas> <1a2c11d47b27dfd8a246300ac158d25cef5abf35.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20260906230022.148733-1-navonjohnlukose@gmail.com> (sfid-20260907_010041_495523_B0CD5EA1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.60.2 (3.60.2-1.fc44) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Mon, 2026-09-07 at 04:30 +0530, Navon John Lukose wrote: > On Tue, 2026-09-01 at 19:02 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > I believe the hardware itself never generates ~0, so yes, it probably > > should use that. >=20 > I'll switch the tests this series adds to PCI_POSSIBLE_ERROR(); drv.c and > trans.c already include linux/pci.h. There's no non-PCI transport to > worry about: Kconfig depends on PCI, and iwl_trans_ops went away in > 0d91a2bfc3dc. >=20 > I'd be more careful with the helper itself. iwl_trans_pcie_read_mem() and > its _no_grab variant run it over dwords they're copying out of SRAM, and > ~0 is a value the driver writes as data (FW_CTXT_INVALID fills unused > binding and quota slots). iwl_dump_ini_dbgi_sram_iter() is the sharp > case: it gives up on a single hit, so one all-ones dword fails a whole > region. I haven't seen it happen, it's just what the value means. > Widening the helper and taking the SRAM paths off it would work, but > that's more churn than belongs here. Your call. >=20 > Separately, the test at the top of iwl_pcie_irq_handler() (rx.c:1948) > looks unreachable: inta has just been masked with at most > CSR_INI_SET_MASK (0xBA00008F). I'd move it above the mask, unless you'd > rather drop it. I'll send that and the PCI_POSSIBLE_ERROR() conversions > separately. >=20 I'm not your remote prompt engineer, so as far as I'm concerned this thread ends here. johannes