From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
To: Louis Kotze <loukot@gmail.com>
Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"rtl8821cerfe2@gmail.com" <rtl8821cerfe2@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] wifi: rtw89: phy: increase RF calibration timeouts for USB transport
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2026 01:15:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1a90ff00d83c47b995cf75165b2a304b@realtek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260415111339.453602-1-loukot@gmail.com>
Louis Kotze <loukot@gmail.com> wrote:
> USB transport adds significant latency to H2C/C2H round-trips used
> by RF calibration. The existing timeout values were designed for PCIe
> and are too tight for USB, causing "failed to wait RF DACK",
> "failed to wait RF TSSI" and similar errors on USB adapters.
>
> Apply a 4x timeout multiplier when the device uses USB transport.
> The multiplier is applied in rtw89_phy_rfk_report_wait() so all
> calibrations benefit without changing any call sites or PCIe
> timeout values.
>
> The 4x multiplier was chosen based on measured data from two
> independent testers (RTL8922AU, 6GHz MLO and 2.4/5GHz):
>
> Calibration PCIe timeout Max measured (USB) 4x timeout
> PRE_NTFY 5ms 1ms 20ms
> DACK 58ms 72ms 232ms
> RX_DCK 128ms 374ms 512ms
> TSSI normal 20ms 24ms 80ms
> TSSI scan 6ms 14ms 24ms
> TXGAPK 54ms 18ms 216ms
> IQK 84ms 53ms 336ms
> DPK 34ms 30ms 136ms
>
> Tested with RTL8922AU on 6GHz MLO (5GHz + 6GHz simultaneous):
> 25 connect/disconnect cycles with zero failures.
>
> In response to review feedback on v1,
Can we remove this phrase? No need to mention v1 in commit message.
> the 4x multiplier was also
> re-verified under adverse host conditions on 5GHz. 5 cycles per
> scenario, stress-ng as the load generator, max observed time per
> calibration:
>
> Calibration PCIe 4x Baseline CPU stress Mem stress Combined
> PRE_NTFY 5 20 0 0 0 1
> DACK 58 232 71 (!) 71 (!) 71 (!) 71 (!)
> RX_DCK 128 512 23 22 22 23
> IQK 84 336 53 53 53 53
> DPK 34 136 23 23 26 23
> TSSI 20 80 6 9 14 9
> TXGAPK 54 216 16 16 16 16
>
> Legend: (!) = exceeds PCIe budget but within 4x budget.
>
> Two observations from that matrix:
>
> 1. DACK exceeds the stock PCIe budget (58ms) in baseline on 5GHz
> on this hardware. Without the 4x multiplier, DACK fails
> -ETIMEDOUT deterministically on every connect, no stress
> needed. This is the specific bug the patch fixes.
I'm not sure this should be called "bug", as Bitterblue has not adjusted
these timeout time by earlier version.
>
> 2. Calibration times are I/O bound (USB H2C/C2H round-trip
> latency),
I'm also not sure if this is correct. The calibration time of DACK might
rely on WiFi hardware and external components, not only I/O speed.
> not CPU or memory bound. DACK stays at 71ms across
> all four scenarios. Host-side stress has essentially zero
> effect on observed calibration duration. Bumping the
> multiplier above 4x would not address a failure mode that
> this stress matrix produces.
>
> Signed-off-by: Louis Kotze <loukot@gmail.com>
Otherwise, patch content looks good to me.
Acked-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-16 1:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <795a8567fdbe48babc5cf0f2b5e10c0a@realtek.com>
2026-04-10 8:00 ` [PATCH 0/2] wifi: rtw89: fix RF calibration for USB transport Louis Kotze
2026-04-10 8:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] wifi: rtw89: phy: increase RF calibration timeouts " Louis Kotze
2026-04-14 6:32 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2026-04-15 11:13 ` Louis Kotze
2026-04-10 8:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] wifi: rtw89: phy: make RF calibration timeouts non-fatal on USB Louis Kotze
2026-04-14 6:39 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2026-04-15 11:13 ` Louis Kotze
2026-04-15 11:13 ` [PATCH v2] wifi: rtw89: phy: increase RF calibration timeouts for USB transport Louis Kotze
2026-04-16 1:15 ` Ping-Ke Shih [this message]
2026-04-16 4:56 ` Louis Kotze
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1a90ff00d83c47b995cf75165b2a304b@realtek.com \
--to=pkshih@realtek.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loukot@gmail.com \
--cc=rtl8821cerfe2@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox