linux-kernel - Re: Regression: QCA6390 fails with "mm/page_alloc: place pages to tail in __free_pages

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <dd24598f-7635-c2e2-9c6d-f320770e3b9e@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:17:55 +0100
From:   Pavel Procopiuc <pavel.procopiuc@...il.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ath11k@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Regression: QCA6390 fails with "mm/page_alloc: place pages to
 tail in __free_pages_core()"

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.