From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.9]) (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 653B51A3BAD; Tue, 1 Oct 2024 13:41:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.9 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727790078; cv=none; b=pTBj0BcM6fHTw7gKjfz4FEHzdb6LCP5oOIYhNNHAuhewAKlb7RoaSBvv7C6l71wB2PtcIp2b3IBGOOTYSMK0bkE62s9YJ+6rnwPApMRJPzQitTlnU7SiAWC6epyjTvTsTH9xMm7ict5dTEoq2TiUYLBEicsFUQ/ooxgPUU9zCsk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727790078; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4v3ujJmrw8t7HXafYzpQ8qHUdGbFJB3gZEk1rs3PORA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Y8PvzXWdeHJiBhxxuR5B/LkcpsarHZxZFq5KvHnWOOrfwfy+4DcE/F8/ec19gqsU2BmFm0TLw23s1FpCrqS9buAfQbX0bsnLJmfzYZVvfs1jpXjwtQbxto0SV36o6+e8L4iI26iAPNfQQHqi3r2wibk7H5auF0YFEbH7GVmpNZI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=R6Kb64Xf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.9 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="R6Kb64Xf" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1727790077; x=1759326077; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=4v3ujJmrw8t7HXafYzpQ8qHUdGbFJB3gZEk1rs3PORA=; b=R6Kb64Xf2+0mB13GgGwRGyf3f2Zh6Ru9/LFQJGVlyxm/XSkWvciR7xjJ CdmMnqlCpCHizl8WigYZ744yr4RVq1svIZZzZFcoxJ5UxB7digaSA6Ixk ve+VpQqi59RRjEDQLaYMrZArWH9Ur39DLXoX2WQS+9sw81QZHf4+vIYhA mJ111TxsVcWYwayUnwHRY2Q+xzbzorSFF0H8AGNJrlSLflxV6Ov6wnsJy sNuPqHXvYl+Mva2chhjZbN/Tm7Ib+wf2oDqDPOoHJn1xMVR+DWcPdixWv ZMy6KyYUTDM0Me/J57jpadufojKpDJIFDcY9sOLo9Jo4qDSL7ZycQho3J g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 2s712ZVaRr2SM2A1ZFlW4Q== X-CSE-MsgGUID: nC+2wDWMSGaBCtxBEmMdAg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11212"; a="49446688" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,167,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="49446688" Received: from fmviesa008.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.148]) by orvoesa101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Oct 2024 06:41:17 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 3xxN3efdSFaNwoIMKmCtKA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: b+H69q+MTd2T66oSkW69Ow== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,167,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="73790598" Received: from stinkpipe.fi.intel.com (HELO stinkbox) ([10.237.72.74]) by fmviesa008.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 01 Oct 2024 06:41:14 -0700 Received: by stinkbox (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 01 Oct 2024 16:41:13 +0300 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2024 16:41:13 +0300 From: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= To: Kalle Valo Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Stanislaw Gruszka Subject: Re: [PATCH] iwlegacy: Clear stale interrupts before enabling interrupts Message-ID: References: <20240930122924.21865-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> <87r0908fuf.fsf@kernel.org> 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=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87r0908fuf.fsf@kernel.org> X-Patchwork-Hint: comment On Tue, Oct 01, 2024 at 10:03:36AM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > Ville Syrjala writes: > > > iwl4965 fails upon resume from hibernation on my laptop. The reason > > seems to be a stale interrupt which isn't being cleared out before > > interrupts are enabled. > > Is this a regression? Do you know what version still worked? Looks like the oldest kernel I have around on that machine is 5.0, and a quick test says it's broken exactly in the same way. So if it's a regression then it's an old one. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel