linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] bus: mhi: core: Add support for forced PM resume

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: <2a181fd4-9248-d68d-7eee-43b19db96461@leemhuis.info>
Date:   Mon, 6 Dec 2021 18:39:19 +0100
From:   Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>
To:     Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
        mhi@...ts.linux.dev
Cc:     hemantk@...eaurora.org, bbhatt@...eaurora.org,
        loic.poulain@...aro.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ath11k@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, kvalo@...eaurora.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Pengyu Ma <mapengyu@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bus: mhi: core: Add support for forced PM resume

Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker speaking.

On 06.12.21 17:10, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> From: Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@...aro.org>
> 
> For whatever reason, some devices like QCA6390, WCN6855 using ath11k
> are not in M3 state during PM resume, but still functional. The
> mhi_pm_resume should then not fail in those cases, and let the higher
> level device specific stack continue resuming process.
> 
> Add a new parameter to mhi_pm_resume, to force resuming, whatever the
> current MHI state is. This fixes a regression with non functional
> ath11k WiFi after suspend/resume cycle on some machines.
> 
> Bug report: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=214179
> 
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org #5.13
> Fixes: 020d3b26c07a ("bus: mhi: Early MHI resume failure in non M3 state")
> Reported-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
> Reported-by: Pengyu Ma <mapengyu@...il.com>

FWIW: In case you need to send an improved patch, could you please add
this before the 'Reported-by:' (see (¹) below for the reasoning):

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/regressions/871r5p0x2u.fsf@codeaurora.org/

And if the patch is already good to go: could the subsystem maintainer
please add it when applying? See(¹) for the reasoning.

Thx.

Ciao, Thorsten, your Linux kernel regression tracker.

(¹) Long story: The commit message would benefit from a link to the
regression report on the mailing list, for reasons explained in
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst. To quote:

```
If related discussions or any other background information behind the
change can be found on the web, add 'Link:' tags pointing to it. In case
your patch fixes a bug, for example, add a tag with a URL referencing
the report in the mailing list archives or a bug tracker;
```

This concept is old, but the text was reworked recently to make this use
case for the Link: tag clearer. For details see:
https://git.kernel.org/linus/1f57bd42b77c

Yes, that "Link:" is not really crucial; but it's good to have if
someone needs to look into the backstory of this change sometime in the
future. But I care for a different reason. I'm tracking this regression
(and others) with regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. This
bot will notice if a patch with a Link: tag to a tracked regression gets
posted and record that, which allowed anyone looking into the regression
to quickly gasp the current status from regzbot's webui
(https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/regzbot ) or its reports. The
bot will also notice if a commit with a Link: tag to a regression report
is applied by Linus and then automatically mark the regression as
resolved then.

IOW: this tag makes my life a regression tracker a lot easier, as I
otherwise have to tell regzbot manually when the fix lands. :-/

P.S.: As a Linux kernel regression tracker I'm getting a lot of reports
on my table. I can only look briefly into most of them. Unfortunately
therefore I sometimes will get things wrong or miss something important.
I hope that's not the case here; if you think it is, don't hesitate to
tell me about it in a public reply. That's in everyone's interest, as
what I wrote above might be misleading to everyone reading this; any
suggestion I gave they thus might sent someone reading this down the
wrong rabbit hole, which none of us wants.

BTW, I have no personal interest in this issue, which is tracked using
regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot
(https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/regzbot/). I'm only posting
this mail to get things rolling again and hence don't need to be CC on
all further activities wrt to this regression.

#regzbot ^backmonitor:
https://lore.kernel.org/regressions/871r5p0x2u.fsf@codeaurora.org/