netdev - Re: qmi-wwan bug

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]

Date:	Thu, 25 Oct 2012 06:19:11 -0400
From:	"Shawn J. Goff" <shawn.goff@...elecon.com>
To:	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
CC:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: qmi-wwan bug

On 10/25/2012 03:40 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> "Shawn J. Goff" <shawn.goff@...elecon.com> writes:
>> On 10/24/2012 05:19 PM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>>> "Shawn J. Goff" <shawn.goff@...elecon.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've only made it happen on my kernel - I
>>>> tried
>>>> on 3.6.2, but it seems to not happen there.
>>> Good. But I have a feeling that you switched more than just the
>>> kernel. Do you see the issue if you run your backport on the same
>>> hardware you tested 3.6.2 on?
>> I just tested my 2.6.39 kernel on the same hardware that had 3.6.2;
>> the problem is absent there.
> As I suspected.  Then I believe this issue is more likely related to
> your hardware platform and/or its other lower layer drivers, and not to
> the backported qmi_wwan driver directly.
>
> Maybe an obscure firmware issue related to timing or other differences?
> That is going to be difficult to track down, if it really is the cause.

That's what I figured when I coudn't reproduce it on the other hardware. 
The first thing I'm going to do is check the power - I noticed the USB 
+5V supply can drop to around 4.8V when the modem is under load. I'll 
apply a bench power supply and see if that fixes things.

>>>    > I've also tried using a
>>>> similar modem that uses a different driver (sierra-net) and that
>>>> doesn't
>>>> have the same problem.
>>> Well, that is an entirely different firmware application and driver,
>>> even if the hardware is similar or even identical.
>> Yes - I wanted to eliminate anything lower (such as usb-net? not sure
>> if qmi-wwan uses that) from being a suspect contributor to the
>> problem.
> Yes, that is useful.  You are perfectly right that most of the host side
> drivers are common. Both sierra_net and qmi_wwan are usbnet minidrivers,
> and almost all network device functionality is served by the shared
> usbnet framework.  So this test pretty much eliminates the host USB
> stack.
>
> Which IMHO points to the firmware implementation as the major
> difference.
>
>>>> When it is in failure, if I try to ping an address, the system sends
>>>> out
>>>> several an ARP requests but gets no response. To get the device to
>>>> respond again, I have to administratively set the wwan interface down,
>>>> then up, use libqmi to get the connection going again, then dhcp to get
>>>>
>>>> an address.
>>> Which sounds like the connection died. Does QMI work at this point, or is that dead too?
>> Looks like qmi works. I can do --nas-get-signal-strength and it gives
>> me good numbers. --wds-get-packet-service-status returns "Connection
>> status: '2'"
> Ah, interesting.  Then we only need to find out where the bulk URBs end
> up.
>
> I would have tried to enable what I could of USB and usbnet debugging to
> see if there are any hints there.  A usbmon trace may also show the
> problem.  I don't know.  But in any case, I believe this is a USB
> problem and probably not too interesting for netdev...
After power, I'll move on to enabling whatever USB debugging I can find.
Thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html