[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YUsRT1rmtITJiJRh@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 14:19:43 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jonas Dreßler <verdre@...d.nl>
Cc: Amitkumar Karwar <amitkarwar@...il.com>,
Ganapathi Bhat <ganapathi017@...il.com>,
Xinming Hu <huxinming820@...il.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Tsuchiya Yuto <kitakar@...il.com>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mwifiex: Try waking the firmware until we get an
interrupt
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 01:48:13PM +0200, Jonas Dreßler wrote:
> It seems that the firmware of the 88W8897 card sometimes ignores or
> misses when we try to wake it up by writing to the firmware status
> register. This leads to the firmware wakeup timeout expiring and the
> driver resetting the card because we assume the firmware has hung up or
> crashed (unfortunately that's not unlikely with this card).
>
> Turns out that most of the time the firmware actually didn't hang up,
> but simply "missed" our wakeup request and didn't send us an AWAKE
> event.
>
> Trying again to read the firmware status register after a short timeout
> usually makes the firmware wake up as expected, so add a small retry
> loop to mwifiex_pm_wakeup_card() that looks at the interrupt status to
> check whether the card woke up.
>
> The number of tries and timeout lengths for this were determined
> experimentally: The firmware usually takes about 500 us to wake up
> after we attempt to read the status register. In some cases where the
> firmware is very busy (for example while doing a bluetooth scan) it
> might even miss our requests for multiple milliseconds, which is why
> after 15 tries the waiting time gets increased to 10 ms. The maximum
> number of tries it took to wake the firmware when testing this was
> around 20, so a maximum number of 50 tries should give us plenty of
> safety margin.
>
> A good reproducer for this issue is letting the firmware sleep and wake
> up in very short intervals, for example by pinging a device on the
> network every 0.1 seconds.
...
> + do {
> + if (mwifiex_write_reg(adapter, reg->fw_status, FIRMWARE_READY_PCIE)) {
> + mwifiex_dbg(adapter, ERROR,
> + "Writing fw_status register failed\n");
> + return -EIO;
> + }
> +
> + n_tries++;
> +
> + if (n_tries <= N_WAKEUP_TRIES_SHORT_INTERVAL)
> + usleep_range(400, 700);
> + else
> + msleep(10);
> + } while (n_tries <= N_WAKEUP_TRIES_SHORT_INTERVAL + N_WAKEUP_TRIES_LONG_INTERVAL &&
> + READ_ONCE(adapter->int_status) == 0);
Can't you use read_poll_timeout() twice instead of this custom approach?
> + mwifiex_dbg(adapter, EVENT,
> + "event: Tried %d times until firmware woke up\n", n_tries);
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists