linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] wifi: mwifiex: decrease timeout waiting for host sleep from 10s to 5s

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: <Z1Cs7-ajeWn7UOpr@google.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2024 11:26:39 -0800
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To: Pin-yen Lin <treapking@...omium.org>
Cc: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
	Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>,
	Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>, David Lin <yu-hao.lin@....com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: mwifiex: decrease timeout waiting for host sleep
 from 10s to 5s

On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 09:45:11PM +0800, Pin-yen Lin wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 10:04 AM Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> > > >  Can you try testing (and gather timing numbers) when
> > > > suspending soon after initiating scans? It's hard to judge what the
> > > > lower limit of this timeout should really be without any numbers, just
> > > > like it's hard to judge whether your 10 second watchdog is reasonable.
> > >
> > > Pin-yen: is this something you could gather?
> 
> I tried entering suspend right after wifi scans, and the time spent in
> mwifiex_enable_hs() is always around 100ms. It seems initiating
> suspend does not increase the execution time for mwifiex_enable_hs(),
> so I think the driver is capable of interrupting a scan.

Thanks! At some level, there are things we can only verify by
experimentation, since we don't have firmware source code. This seems
fine to me then.

> > > > Also, for the record, since we might have to field regression reports
> > > > for other systems: what hardware (chip variant, FW version) are you
> > > > seeing problems on?
> > >
> > > Pin-yen: I'm assuming you'll provide this.
> 
> From the debugfs entry:
> 
> driver_name = "mwifiex"
> driver_version = mwifiex 1.0 (15.68.19.p54)
> verext = w8897o-B0, RF87XX, FP68, 15.68.19.p54
> 
> The compatible string of the DT is "marvell,sd8897".

Thanks.

I think it'd be good to see this info in the commit message, but
otherwise you can carry my:

Acked-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>

It'd be extra nice to see that you successfully use this patch in
your own releases, but I don't think that's a requirement for upstream.
And anyway, the upstream RC cycle is pretty long.

Brian