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=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LOTS_OF_MONEY,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 B3709C4742C for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:10:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50250207DE for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:10:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mg.codeaurora.org header.i=@mg.codeaurora.org header.b="nJQhJ93h" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726379AbgKMLKk (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:10:40 -0500 Received: from m42-4.mailgun.net ([69.72.42.4]:58645 "EHLO m42-4.mailgun.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726563AbgKMLIh (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:08:37 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1605265705; h=Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Cc: To: From: Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type: MIME-Version: Sender; bh=I/CVbI8TPJTyTAGZ/DnpOIXP94vnB8sbEPZNC//8PdI=; b=nJQhJ93haf4inr8eONELOtPVEVwRd+zfgwrCPdWBNCEyYVMbuouKWEhkBl/1n4gBPl4Wlqul ODPc5dxOWhC1e8mxCgwYL7D7092FeQ8uTSMBw6/ExouHOU8+jEUlWB0KdtGQyv3XtiayXfu/ biwLAhupz37mzzzHy5XRn27rOFs= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 69.72.42.4 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-n09.prod.us-east-1.postgun.com with SMTP id 5fae6927d6e6336a4e6accd2 (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:08:23 GMT Sender: cjhuang=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 5A6F7C43385; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:08:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: cjhuang) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C0E8C433C8; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:08:21 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 19:08:21 +0800 From: Carl Huang To: Pavel Procopiuc Cc: David Hildenbrand , Kalle Valo , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ath11k@lists.infradead.org, Vlastimil Babka Subject: Re: Regression: QCA6390 fails with "mm/page_alloc: place pages to tail in __free_pages_core()" In-Reply-To: References: <8ACA82DB-D2FE-4599-8A01-D42218FDE1E5@redhat.com> <87eekz4s04.fsf@codeaurora.org> <9d307c40-5ea1-8938-819d-f1742cb99945@gmail.com> Message-ID: X-Sender: cjhuang@codeaurora.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.9 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2020-11-13 16:17, Pavel Procopiuc wrote: > Op 12.11.2020 om 11:48 schreef David Hildenbrand: >> Trying to understand the code, it looks like there are always two >> rounds of reqests. The first one always fails ("requesting one big >> chunk of DMA memory"), the second one (providing multiple chunks of >> DMA memory) is supposed to work - and we do allocate memory. >> >> >> In the *working* cases we have >> >> Respond mem req failed, result: 1, err: 0 >> qmi failed to respond fw mem req:-22 >> ... >> chip_id 0x0 chip_family 0xb board_id 0xff soc_id 0xffffffff >> >> We don't fail in qmi_txn_wait() - second request w >> >> >> In the *non-working* cases we have >> >> Respond mem req failed, result: 1, err: 0 >> qmi failed to respond fw mem req:-22 >> ... >> qmi failed memory request, err = -110 >> qmi failed to respond fw mem req:-110 >> >> We fail in qmi_txn_wait(). We run into a timeout (ETIMEDOUT). >> >> Can we bump up the timeout limit and see if things change? Maybe FW >> needs more time with other addresses. > > I tried increasing ATH11K_QMI_WLANFW_TIMEOUT_MS 20 times to 100000 > (i.e. 100 seconds) and it didn't have any positive effect, the second > error (-110) just came 100 seconds later and not 5. > Checked some logs. Looks when the error happens, the physical address are very small. Its' between 20M - 30M. So could you have a try to reserve the memory starting from 20M? Add "memmap=10M\$20M" to your grub.cfg or edit in kernel parameters. so ath11k can't allocate from these address. Or you can try to reserve even larger memory starting from 20M.