From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mout01.posteo.de (mout01.posteo.de [185.67.36.65]) (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 C9C6F2D0C94 for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2026 20:19:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.67.36.65 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787429947; cv=none; b=WSDOaeSfPl7XsA+97qgfGBz34KB7yoe19Wh+vdRJFGBaelHPqZbsZBTYh3AUlsi9QLT/AVIRLyCvKJs8piosRIw9bhMmz/J0rH2xOqBslV/u2PuQUgw5t5S4v9FS+0o67TnOLjHuv1/xK2DhAt1oMpbBx2MAeZixQErDV2Ujyh4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787429947; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zFwnyY1tZmN01OUrHRWftRgdvztPP6ZHKh1+wBAQgk4=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:From:To:Cc:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=T4XN6iPKuc5FoN4Scvf3KcKA2cTl/r8zLne5ofDxahZlJqt9nUwMWD0kMFw8np7l6gztvjoSNbwr2IaVGo0a1ElRlE1ETTXsWpx2+fbtpF2DPqQ7jsqrRYREY75BXXZ8kXBQdWqpilhxk2nXSlidTBw254IQwi8dCjWMYTvY7ts= 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=CebJHQm9; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.67.36.65 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="CebJHQm9" Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E5F3240029 for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2026 22:18:58 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=posteo.de; s=1984.8680eb; t=1787429938; bh=LqNKr0iSvKM4yPm4fqu/h4Hh6DQs1Ucl5vow3O4GAd8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:From:To:Cc:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:From; b=CebJHQm9Ysfux7EVJQIVmrQT6FuCdCLYreX/7ysIT6vPQR3+dNiiICGUJ3yLiZi16 Bnec1itW46AiS0Xe7e0Vy5l63r/XQMUTKCnQb4ISP/2TWz2zSVqUiAHVUJHL7NUoec v5hc3NasvM/LSP1MipJHJyszXPaRRxaCFbxvG+C6jD1S6yL7jN3Bf8WLzXqVNK31T5 Yxj3K/PiJ1DeZqEKdT4bxPvJJdVCSKjOMnC7363tcuzflCiQV1tPY5aJYIPSmNHBXh Vrq0quRIfSHTHzl2954u5fklqev5kCpdheYucaNvXZOYl00slCewilAdkCP6Cc1fzR XxYobeTaz6Ugw== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4hS7mc3rkpz9rxL; Sat, 22 Aug 2026 22:18:56 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2026 20:18:57 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] mt7925: MLO connectivity silently stalls with 6GHz link active From: Jonas Hort To: Devin Wittmayer Cc: Thorsten Leemhuis , regressions@lists.linux.dev, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Felix Fietkau , lorenzo.bianconi83@gmail.com References: <503eb10e-80cf-493e-95fd-04fc0f94ce01@posteo.de> Content-Language: en-US, de-DE In-Reply-To: <503eb10e-80cf-493e-95fd-04fc0f94ce01@posteo.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Quick update: v7.0 vanilla has been running clean for over 2 hours now with MLO active (5GHz+6GHz, same FritzBox 5690 Pro), no freeze at all. Am 19.08.26 um 11:03 schrieb Jonas Hort: > 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. >> >> 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, so a >> link switch that never finished cannot be what starts this. The middle one >> 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. >> >> 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 that >> show it. The failure 4/5 fixes stops mt76_txq_schedule_list from servicing >> the queue, and the one 5/5 fixes stops mt76_txq_send_burst once the non-AQL >> 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 tail >> 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. >> >> On the bisect I would build v7.0 next. There are 32 mt7925 commits between >> 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 already >> 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 would >> look first rather than the only place worth looking. >> >> Devin >> >> Am 17.08.26 um 23:34 schrieb Jonas Hort: >> >>> 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. >> Am 17.08.26 um 16:25 schrieb Jonas Hort: >> >>> 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 [...] >>> >>> Update on the ROC tracing: three real freezes captured now with the >>> kprobes active (all confirmed via the WFDMA0 tail-frozen signature). >>> >>> - Freeze #1 (15:37): no ROC activity in the trace. >>> - Freeze #2 (15:43): [...] The trace shows several ROC events >>>   (rocabort, mloroc, rocwork) clustered together. >>> - Freeze #3 (16:15): no ROC activity again. >>> >>> Uploaded all three logs to the bugzilla ticket if useful: >>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=221884