Patch "iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code" has been added to the 4.7-stable tree

Patch "iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code" has been added to the 4.7-stable tree

[gregkh]

This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code

to the 4.7-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     iwlwifi-mvm-handle-frame_release-in-mq-code.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.7 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.


>From 58035432d60616cc2ef6514a3d0e6d6ad01bf705 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 13:33:26 +0200
Subject: iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code

From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>

commit 58035432d60616cc2ef6514a3d0e6d6ad01bf705 upstream.

For some reason, the FRAME_RELEASE message handling for the
default queue ended up being in the only/default queue for
non-RSS devices; fix that and handle FRAME_RELEASE properly
on the default queue for RSS devices.

Fixes: 585a6fccf5b8 ("iwlwifi: mvm: infrastructure for frame-release message")
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
 drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/ops.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/ops.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/ops.c
@@ -936,8 +936,6 @@ static void iwl_mvm_rx(struct iwl_op_mod
 
 	if (likely(pkt->hdr.cmd == REPLY_RX_MPDU_CMD))
 		iwl_mvm_rx_rx_mpdu(mvm, napi, rxb);
-	else if (pkt->hdr.cmd == FRAME_RELEASE)
-		iwl_mvm_rx_frame_release(mvm, napi, rxb, 0);
 	else if (pkt->hdr.cmd == REPLY_RX_PHY_CMD)
 		iwl_mvm_rx_rx_phy_cmd(mvm, rxb);
 	else
@@ -958,6 +956,8 @@ static void iwl_mvm_rx_mq(struct iwl_op_
 	else if (unlikely(pkt->hdr.group_id == DATA_PATH_GROUP &&
 			  pkt->hdr.cmd == RX_QUEUES_NOTIFICATION))
 		iwl_mvm_rx_queue_notif(mvm, rxb, 0);
+	else if (pkt->hdr.cmd == FRAME_RELEASE)
+		iwl_mvm_rx_frame_release(mvm, napi, rxb, 0);
 	else
 		iwl_mvm_rx_common(mvm, rxb, pkt);
 }


Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from johannes.berg@intel.com are

queue-4.7/iwlwifi-mvm-handle-frame_release-in-mq-code.patch

Re: Patch "iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code" has been added to the 4.7-stable tree

[Johannes Berg]

On Tue, 2016-10-04 at 16:22 +0000, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
> 
>     iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code
> 
> to the 4.7-stable tree which can be found at:
>     http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue
> .git;a=summary
> 
> The filename of the patch is:
>      iwlwifi-mvm-handle-frame_release-in-mq-code.patch
> and it can be found in the queue-4.7 subdirectory.
> 
> If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable
> tree, please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.

I have no particular objections to including this, but it only fixes
something for (unreleased) hardware that will likely never work on the
4.7 kernel (due to also unreleased firmware, and likelihood of never
releasing older firmware versions).

So there's almost certainly no point, but OTOH it also cannot possibly
hurt since this code path is only taken with that particular hardware.

johannes

Re: Patch "iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code" has been added to the 4.7-stable tree

[gregkh]

On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:38:10AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-10-04 at 16:22 +0000, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
> > 
> > ����iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code
> > 
> > to the 4.7-stable tree which can be found at:
> > ����http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue
> > .git;a=summary
> > 
> > The filename of the patch is:
> > �����iwlwifi-mvm-handle-frame_release-in-mq-code.patch
> > and it can be found in the queue-4.7 subdirectory.
> > 
> > If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable
> > tree, please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
> 
> I have no particular objections to including this, but it only fixes
> something for (unreleased) hardware that will likely never work on the
> 4.7 kernel (due to also unreleased firmware, and likelihood of never
> releasing older firmware versions).
> 
> So there's almost certainly no point, but OTOH it also cannot possibly
> hurt since this code path is only taken with that particular hardware.

Ok, thanks for letting me know, I've now dropped it from the stable
queue.

greg k-h

Re: Patch "iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code" has been added to the 4.7-stable tree

[Coelho, Luciano]

On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 08:47 +0200, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:38:10AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 2016-10-04 at 16:22 +0000, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > > 
> > > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
> > > 
> > >     iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code
> > > 
> > > to the 4.7-stable tree which can be found at:
> > >     http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue
> > > .git;a=summary
> > > 
> > > The filename of the patch is:
> > >      iwlwifi-mvm-handle-frame_release-in-mq-code.patch
> > > and it can be found in the queue-4.7 subdirectory.
> > > 
> > > If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable
> > > tree, please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
> > 
> > I have no particular objections to including this, but it only fixes
> > something for (unreleased) hardware that will likely never work on the
> > 4.7 kernel (due to also unreleased firmware, and likelihood of never
> > releasing older firmware versions).
> > 
> > So there's almost certainly no point, but OTOH it also cannot possibly
> > hurt since this code path is only taken with that particular hardware.
> 
> Ok, thanks for letting me know, I've now dropped it from the stable
> queue.

Is there a way to mark the Fixes tag with the minimum kernel version as we would do e.g. with "Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.8+"?

-- 
Cheers,
Luca.

Re: Patch "iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code" has been added to the 4.7-stable tree

[gregkh]

On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:15:41AM +0000, Coelho, Luciano wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 08:47 +0200, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:38:10AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 2016-10-04 at 16:22 +0000, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
> > > > 
> > > > ����iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code
> > > > 
> > > > to the 4.7-stable tree which can be found at:
> > > > ����http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue
> > > > .git;a=summary
> > > > 
> > > > The filename of the patch is:
> > > > �����iwlwifi-mvm-handle-frame_release-in-mq-code.patch
> > > > and it can be found in the queue-4.7 subdirectory.
> > > > 
> > > > If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable
> > > > tree, please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
> > > 
> > > I have no particular objections to including this, but it only fixes
> > > something for (unreleased) hardware that will likely never work on the
> > > 4.7 kernel (due to also unreleased firmware, and likelihood of never
> > > releasing older firmware versions).
> > > 
> > > So there's almost certainly no point, but OTOH it also cannot possibly
> > > hurt since this code path is only taken with that particular hardware.
> > 
> > Ok, thanks for letting me know, I've now dropped it from the stable
> > queue.
> 
> Is there a way to mark the Fixes tag with the minimum kernel version as we would do e.g. with "Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org�# 4.8+"?

The fixes tag is to show what commit it fixed.  And since you were
fixing a patch that is in the 4.7 release, you are implying that it is
resolving an issue for that kernel, right?

So just don't use the fixes: tag if that's not what you are really
doing.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: Patch "iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code" has been added to the 4.7-stable tree

[Coelho, Luciano]

On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 09:24 +0200, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:15:41AM +0000, Coelho, Luciano wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 08:47 +0200, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:38:10AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, 2016-10-04 at 16:22 +0000, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
> > > > > 
> > > > >     iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code
> > > > > 
> > > > > to the 4.7-stable tree which can be found at:
> > > > >     http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue
> > > > > .git;a=summary
> > > > > 
> > > > > The filename of the patch is:
> > > > >      iwlwifi-mvm-handle-frame_release-in-mq-code.patch
> > > > > and it can be found in the queue-4.7 subdirectory.
> > > > > 
> > > > > If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable
> > > > > tree, please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
> > > > 
> > > > I have no particular objections to including this, but it only fixes
> > > > something for (unreleased) hardware that will likely never work on the
> > > > 4.7 kernel (due to also unreleased firmware, and likelihood of never
> > > > releasing older firmware versions).
> > > > 
> > > > So there's almost certainly no point, but OTOH it also cannot possibly
> > > > hurt since this code path is only taken with that particular hardware.
> > > 
> > > Ok, thanks for letting me know, I've now dropped it from the stable
> > > queue.
> > 
> > Is there a way to mark the Fixes tag with the minimum kernel
> > version as we would do e.g. with "Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #
> > 4.8+"?
> 
> The fixes tag is to show what commit it fixed.  And since you were
> fixing a patch that is in the 4.7 release, you are implying that it is
> resolving an issue for that kernel, right?

Well, what I meant is what happened in this case.  We try to keep our
upstream driver in sync with our internal trees, sometimes (again, as
in this case) when the HW is not even out yet.

Let's say the hardware in question would be supported fully only from
4.9+, but a pre-work patch is already in 4.8.  The Fixes tag *does*
point to a real commit it fixes, but it is only relevant for 4.9+...

Anyway, this is probably a very rare case.  I was just nitpicking and
thinking whether we could have prevented the (small) overhead of
getting the patch in the stable queue, getting a comment and removing
it from the queue, when we already knew from the beginning that it was
irrelevant for some kernels.

--
Cheers,
Luca.

Re: Patch "iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code" has been added to the 4.7-stable tree

[gregkh]

On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:35:01AM +0000, Coelho, Luciano wrote:
> Anyway, this is probably a very rare case.

Yes it is, this is the first time it has come up in over a decade of
stable kernels that I can tell :)

> I was just nitpicking and thinking whether we could have prevented the
> (small) overhead of getting the patch in the stable queue, getting a
> comment and removing it from the queue, when we already knew from the
> beginning that it was irrelevant for some kernels.

A simple email like happened should be fine, it's easy to drop a patch
like I did.  No need to micromanage the process for something that is so
rare...

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: Patch "iwlwifi: mvm: handle FRAME_RELEASE in MQ code" has been added to the 4.7-stable tree

[Coelho, Luciano]

On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 09:47 +0200, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:35:01AM +0000, Coelho, Luciano wrote:
> > 
> > Anyway, this is probably a very rare case.
> 
> Yes it is, this is the first time it has come up in over a decade of
> stable kernels that I can tell :)

Heheh, I had never seen something like this either and Johannes said
the same thing. :P


> > I was just nitpicking and thinking whether we could have prevented the
> > (small) overhead of getting the patch in the stable queue, getting a
> > comment and removing it from the queue, when we already knew from the
> > beginning that it was irrelevant for some kernels.
> 
> A simple email like happened should be fine, it's easy to drop a patch
> like I did.  No need to micromanage the process for something that is so
> rare...

Okay, sorry for the noise. :)


-- 
Cheers,
Luca.