From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19B04C433E6 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:07:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4A2064F12 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:07:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234076AbhCMRGu (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Mar 2021 12:06:50 -0500 Received: from z11.mailgun.us ([104.130.96.11]:51008 "EHLO z11.mailgun.us" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233671AbhCMRGg (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Mar 2021 12:06:36 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1615655196; h=Content-Type: MIME-Version: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Date: References: Subject: Cc: To: From: Sender; bh=OFxon1S+AsfdLrBubt8ZlpabpvFG38RLZ9ix2wD5q+I=; b=Do6MIgpDBzLMoaFnCexjwFF5z5xr9vtft3txZ33LngkilbODBcote88ACL6lm7iR7qXEzKnA ocpzLEwvC5nfhL53R17T3jy/PUhCYBNeZODs5f0pgZP0Avp84Ej64LqjF+BTx2pypZX4rve7 YwqniRMlcPLXWY7iKQw0AptBVy0= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 104.130.96.11 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyI0MWYwYSIsICJsaW51eC1rZXJuZWxAdmdlci5rZXJuZWwub3JnIiwgImJlOWU0YSJd Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org (ec2-35-166-182-171.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.166.182.171]) by smtp-out-n06.prod.us-west-2.postgun.com with SMTP id 604cf10ee2200c0a0de00998 (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:06:22 GMT Sender: kvalo=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 4C28FC433CA; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:06:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from potku.adurom.net (88-114-240-156.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.240.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kvalo) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F9E6C433C6; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:06:19 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 5F9E6C433C6 Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org From: Kalle Valo To: Luca Coelho Cc: Jiri Kosina , Johannes Berg , Emmanuel Grumbach , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: Fix softirq/hardirq disabling in iwl_pcie_enqueue_hcmd() References: <87h7lfbowr.fsf@tynnyri.adurom.net> Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2021 19:06:17 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Luca Coelho's message of "Sat, 13 Mar 2021 18:32:26 +0200") Message-ID: <87zgz7t246.fsf@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Luca Coelho writes: > On Sat, 2021-03-13 at 16:43 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote: >> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021, Kalle Valo wrote: >> >> > > > > From: Jiri Kosina >> > > > > >> > > > > It's possible for iwl_pcie_enqueue_hcmd() to be called with hard IRQs >> > > > > disabled (e.g. from LED core). We can't enable BHs in such a situation. >> > > > > >> > > > > Turn the unconditional BH-enable/BH-disable code into >> > > > > hardirq-disable/conditional-enable. >> > > > > >> > > > > This fixes the warning below. >> > > > >> > > > Hi, >> > > > >> > > > friendly ping on this one ... >> > > >> > > Luca, >> > > >> > > Johannes is telling me that he merged this patch internally, but I have no >> > > idea what is happening to it ... ? >> > > >> > > The reported splat is a clear bug, so it should be fixed one way or the >> > > other. >> > >> > Should I take this to wireless-drivers? >> >> I can't speak for the maintainers, but as far as I am concerned, it >> definitely is a 5.12 material, as it fixes real scheduling bug. > > Yes, please take this to w-d. We have a similar patch internally, but > there's a backlog and it will take me some time to get to it. I'll > resolve eventual conflicts when time comes. Ok, can I have your ack for patchwork? -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches