netdev - Re: [PATCH] mwifiex: Add quirk to disable deep sleep with certain hardware revision

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: <CA+ASDXOrad3b=b8+vwuF6m3+ZcigVaoJySpDXXZOnC3O8CJBSw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Oct 2021 14:27:06 -0700
From:   Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
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,
        Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mwifiex: Add quirk to disable deep sleep with certain
 hardware revision

On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:37 AM Jonas Dreßler <verdre@...d.nl> wrote:
>
> The 88W8897 PCIe+USB card in the hardware revision 20 apparently has a
> hardware issue where the card wakes up from deep sleep randomly and very
> often, somewhat depending on the card activity, maybe the hardware has a
> floating wakeup pin or something.

What makes you think it's associated with the particular "hardware
revision 20"? Have you used multiple revisions on the same platform
and found that only certain ones fail in this way? Otherwise, your
theory in the last part of your sentence sounds like a platform issue,
where you might do a DMI match instead.

> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/sta_cmdresp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/sta_cmdresp.c
> @@ -708,6 +708,22 @@ static int mwifiex_ret_ver_ext(struct mwifiex_private *priv,
>  {
>         struct host_cmd_ds_version_ext *ver_ext = &resp->params.verext;
>
> +       if (test_and_clear_bit(MWIFIEX_IS_REQUESTING_FW_VEREXT, &priv->adapter->work_flags)) {
> +               if (strncmp(ver_ext->version_str, "ChipRev:20, BB:9b(10.00), RF:40(21)", 128) == 0) {

Rather than memorize the 128-size array here, maybe use
sizeof(ver_ext->version_str) ?

Brian