* Today's linux-next iwlwifi broken
@ 2021-02-11 16:10 Heiner Kallweit
2021-02-11 20:23 ` Luca Coelho
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Heiner Kallweit @ 2021-02-11 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Luca Coelho; +Cc: linux-wireless
Today's linux-next has a bunch of issues, at least with my AX210 (0024) card.
First I got a GPF in iwl_request_firmware(), cfg->fw_name_pre was invalid.
After some digging into it I found that 6f60fb03c8e7 ("iwlwifi: move SnJ
and So rules to the new tables") removed the entries for some cards.
Obviously 5febcdef3090 and 9b15596c5006 weren't synced with some parallel
development.
After adding the entry for 0024 I now get the following lockdep warning.
Isn't there any regression testing with lockdep enabled?
Also warning "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is still
there, IIRC we talked about this weeks ago.
[ 4.561774] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002)
[ 4.630849] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Direct firmware load for iwlwifi-ty-a0-gf-a0-61.ucode failed with error -2
[ 4.639817] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver
[ 4.640062] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: TLV_FW_FSEQ_VERSION: FSEQ Version: 93.8.73.28
[ 4.642138] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: loaded firmware version 60.84d9abea.0 ty-a0-gf-a0-60.ucode op_mode iwlmvm
[ 4.760541] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Detected Intel(R) Wi-Fi 6 AX210 160MHz, REV=0x420
[ 4.942350] irq/131-iwlwifi/2094 just changed the state of lock:
[ 4.942358] ffffa3fc07f080b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.942504] 1 lock held by irq/131-iwlwifi/2094:
[ 4.942511] #0: ffffa3fc0855c170 (sync_cmd_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0x47/0x100 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943219] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x208/0x6e0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943242] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943264] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943289] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.943329] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.943360] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.943391] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.943424] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943446] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943467] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.943588] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943612] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943635] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943662] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.943695] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.943728] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.943760] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.943793] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943816] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943838] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.943954] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.943978] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944063] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944147] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944170] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944194] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944220] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.944255] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.944287] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.944319] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.944352] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944375] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944397] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm]
[ 4.944493] ... key at: [<ffffffffc0c2e0c0>] __key.12+0x0/0xffffffffffff0f40 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944547] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944569] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944643] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944705] CPU: 0 PID: 2094 Comm: irq/131-iwlwifi Not tainted 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210211+ #1
[ 4.944786] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944825] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944847] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944878] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944949] ? iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xab/0x100 [iwlwifi]
[ 4.944981] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: Today's linux-next iwlwifi broken 2021-02-11 16:10 Today's linux-next iwlwifi broken Heiner Kallweit @ 2021-02-11 20:23 ` Luca Coelho 2021-02-11 21:41 ` Heiner Kallweit 2021-02-12 12:21 ` Heiner Kallweit 0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Luca Coelho @ 2021-02-11 20:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Heiner Kallweit; +Cc: linux-wireless On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 17:10 +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > Today's linux-next has a bunch of issues, at least with my AX210 (0024) card. > > First I got a GPF in iwl_request_firmware(), cfg->fw_name_pre was invalid. > After some digging into it I found that 6f60fb03c8e7 ("iwlwifi: move SnJ > and So rules to the new tables") removed the entries for some cards. > Obviously 5febcdef3090 and 9b15596c5006 weren't synced with some parallel > development. > After adding the entry for 0024 I now get the following lockdep warning. > Isn't there any regression testing with lockdep enabled? > Also warning "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is still > there, IIRC we talked about this weeks ago. > > > [ 4.561774] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) > [ 4.630849] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Direct firmware load for iwlwifi-ty-a0-gf-a0-61.ucode failed with error -2 > [ 4.639817] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver > [ 4.640062] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: TLV_FW_FSEQ_VERSION: FSEQ Version: 93.8.73.28 > [ 4.642138] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: loaded firmware version 60.84d9abea.0 ty-a0-gf-a0-60.ucode op_mode iwlmvm > [ 4.760541] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Detected Intel(R) Wi-Fi 6 AX210 160MHz, REV=0x420 > [ 4.942350] irq/131-iwlwifi/2094 just changed the state of lock: > [ 4.942358] ffffa3fc07f080b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.942504] 1 lock held by irq/131-iwlwifi/2094: > [ 4.942511] #0: ffffa3fc0855c170 (sync_cmd_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0x47/0x100 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943219] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x208/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943242] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943264] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943289] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.943329] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.943360] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.943391] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.943424] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943446] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943467] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.943588] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943612] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943635] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943662] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.943695] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.943728] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.943760] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.943793] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943816] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943838] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.943954] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.943978] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944063] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944147] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944170] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944194] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944220] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.944255] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.944287] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.944319] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.944352] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944375] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944397] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] > [ 4.944493] ... key at: [<ffffffffc0c2e0c0>] __key.12+0x0/0xffffffffffff0f40 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944547] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944569] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944643] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944705] CPU: 0 PID: 2094 Comm: irq/131-iwlwifi Not tainted 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210211+ #1 > [ 4.944786] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944825] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944847] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944878] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944949] ? iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xab/0x100 [iwlwifi] > [ 4.944981] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] Thanks for reporting! We made a bunch of fixes in this area and Kalle just pulled them to wireless-drivers-next. I believe these changes will be in tomorrow's linux-next. Can you retry it then? -- Cheers, Luca. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Today's linux-next iwlwifi broken 2021-02-11 20:23 ` Luca Coelho @ 2021-02-11 21:41 ` Heiner Kallweit 2021-02-12 12:21 ` Heiner Kallweit 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Heiner Kallweit @ 2021-02-11 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Luca Coelho; +Cc: linux-wireless On 11.02.2021 21:23, Luca Coelho wrote: > On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 17:10 +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote: >> Today's linux-next has a bunch of issues, at least with my AX210 (0024) card. >> >> First I got a GPF in iwl_request_firmware(), cfg->fw_name_pre was invalid. >> After some digging into it I found that 6f60fb03c8e7 ("iwlwifi: move SnJ >> and So rules to the new tables") removed the entries for some cards. >> Obviously 5febcdef3090 and 9b15596c5006 weren't synced with some parallel >> development. >> After adding the entry for 0024 I now get the following lockdep warning. >> Isn't there any regression testing with lockdep enabled? >> Also warning "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is still >> there, IIRC we talked about this weeks ago. >> >> >> [ 4.561774] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) >> [ 4.630849] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Direct firmware load for iwlwifi-ty-a0-gf-a0-61.ucode failed with error -2 >> [ 4.639817] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver >> [ 4.640062] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: TLV_FW_FSEQ_VERSION: FSEQ Version: 93.8.73.28 >> [ 4.642138] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: loaded firmware version 60.84d9abea.0 ty-a0-gf-a0-60.ucode op_mode iwlmvm >> [ 4.760541] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Detected Intel(R) Wi-Fi 6 AX210 160MHz, REV=0x420 >> [ 4.942350] irq/131-iwlwifi/2094 just changed the state of lock: >> [ 4.942358] ffffa3fc07f080b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.942504] 1 lock held by irq/131-iwlwifi/2094: >> [ 4.942511] #0: ffffa3fc0855c170 (sync_cmd_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0x47/0x100 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943219] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x208/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943242] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943264] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943289] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943329] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943360] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943391] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943424] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943446] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943467] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943588] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943612] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943635] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943662] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943695] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943728] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943760] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943793] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943816] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943838] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943954] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943978] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944063] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944147] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944170] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944194] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944220] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.944255] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.944287] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.944319] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.944352] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944375] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944397] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.944493] ... key at: [<ffffffffc0c2e0c0>] __key.12+0x0/0xffffffffffff0f40 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944547] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944569] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944643] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944705] CPU: 0 PID: 2094 Comm: irq/131-iwlwifi Not tainted 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210211+ #1 >> [ 4.944786] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944825] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944847] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944878] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944949] ? iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xab/0x100 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944981] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] > > Thanks for reporting! > > We made a bunch of fixes in this area and Kalle just pulled them to > wireless-drivers-next. I believe these changes will be in tomorrow's > linux-next. Can you retry it then? > Thanks, I'll re-test tomorrow and let you know. > -- > Cheers, > Luca. > Heiner ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Today's linux-next iwlwifi broken 2021-02-11 20:23 ` Luca Coelho 2021-02-11 21:41 ` Heiner Kallweit @ 2021-02-12 12:21 ` Heiner Kallweit 2021-02-12 14:13 ` Heiner Kallweit 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Heiner Kallweit @ 2021-02-12 12:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Luca Coelho; +Cc: linux-wireless On 11.02.2021 21:23, Luca Coelho wrote: > On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 17:10 +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote: >> Today's linux-next has a bunch of issues, at least with my AX210 (0024) card. >> >> First I got a GPF in iwl_request_firmware(), cfg->fw_name_pre was invalid. >> After some digging into it I found that 6f60fb03c8e7 ("iwlwifi: move SnJ >> and So rules to the new tables") removed the entries for some cards. >> Obviously 5febcdef3090 and 9b15596c5006 weren't synced with some parallel >> development. >> After adding the entry for 0024 I now get the following lockdep warning. >> Isn't there any regression testing with lockdep enabled? >> Also warning "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is still >> there, IIRC we talked about this weeks ago. >> >> >> [ 4.561774] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) >> [ 4.630849] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Direct firmware load for iwlwifi-ty-a0-gf-a0-61.ucode failed with error -2 >> [ 4.639817] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver >> [ 4.640062] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: TLV_FW_FSEQ_VERSION: FSEQ Version: 93.8.73.28 >> [ 4.642138] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: loaded firmware version 60.84d9abea.0 ty-a0-gf-a0-60.ucode op_mode iwlmvm >> [ 4.760541] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Detected Intel(R) Wi-Fi 6 AX210 160MHz, REV=0x420 >> [ 4.942350] irq/131-iwlwifi/2094 just changed the state of lock: >> [ 4.942358] ffffa3fc07f080b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.942504] 1 lock held by irq/131-iwlwifi/2094: >> [ 4.942511] #0: ffffa3fc0855c170 (sync_cmd_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0x47/0x100 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943219] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x208/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943242] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943264] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943289] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943329] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943360] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943391] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943424] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943446] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943467] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943588] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943612] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943635] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943662] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943695] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943728] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943760] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943793] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943816] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943838] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.943954] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.943978] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944063] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944147] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944170] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944194] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944220] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.944255] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.944287] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.944319] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.944352] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944375] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944397] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >> [ 4.944493] ... key at: [<ffffffffc0c2e0c0>] __key.12+0x0/0xffffffffffff0f40 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944547] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944569] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944643] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944705] CPU: 0 PID: 2094 Comm: irq/131-iwlwifi Not tainted 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210211+ #1 >> [ 4.944786] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944825] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944847] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944878] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944949] ? iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xab/0x100 [iwlwifi] >> [ 4.944981] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] > > Thanks for reporting! > > We made a bunch of fixes in this area and Kalle just pulled them to > wireless-drivers-next. I believe these changes will be in tomorrow's > linux-next. Can you retry it then? > I tested today's linux-next: The lockdep warning is still there and occurs w/o any traffic on boot. No CI machine on your side w/ lockdep enabled? [ 5.845931] ======================================================== [ 5.845938] WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected [ 5.845946] 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210212+ #1 Not tainted [ 5.845954] -------------------------------------------------------- [ 5.845961] irq/131-iwlwifi/2132 just changed the state of lock: [ 5.845969] ffff8ca6c88600b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] [ 5.846011] but this lock took another, SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock in the past: [ 5.846019] (napi_hash_lock){+.+.}-{2:2} [ 5.846023] and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them. [ 5.846039] other info that might help us debug this: [ 5.846047] Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario: [ 5.846055] CPU0 CPU1 [ 5.846061] ---- ---- [ 5.846066] lock(napi_hash_lock); [ 5.846074] local_irq_disable(); [ 5.846081] lock(&rxq->lock); [ 5.846090] lock(napi_hash_lock); [ 5.846099] <Interrupt> [ 5.846103] lock(&rxq->lock); [ 5.846110] *** DEADLOCK *** "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is also still there 0024 AX210 version is now detected. When I disable the entry I don't get a GPF any longer but a WARN() is triggered. Not sure why a WARN() was chosen because the call trace provides no benefit here. More helpful would be a simple error message stating: "dev id foo: unknown dev sub id bar. Contact maintainers." > -- > Cheers, > Luca. > Heiner ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Today's linux-next iwlwifi broken 2021-02-12 12:21 ` Heiner Kallweit @ 2021-02-12 14:13 ` Heiner Kallweit 2021-02-12 14:38 ` Sedat Dilek 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Heiner Kallweit @ 2021-02-12 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Luca Coelho; +Cc: linux-wireless On 12.02.2021 13:21, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > On 11.02.2021 21:23, Luca Coelho wrote: >> On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 17:10 +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote: >>> Today's linux-next has a bunch of issues, at least with my AX210 (0024) card. >>> >>> First I got a GPF in iwl_request_firmware(), cfg->fw_name_pre was invalid. >>> After some digging into it I found that 6f60fb03c8e7 ("iwlwifi: move SnJ >>> and So rules to the new tables") removed the entries for some cards. >>> Obviously 5febcdef3090 and 9b15596c5006 weren't synced with some parallel >>> development. >>> After adding the entry for 0024 I now get the following lockdep warning. >>> Isn't there any regression testing with lockdep enabled? >>> Also warning "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is still >>> there, IIRC we talked about this weeks ago. >>> >>> >>> [ 4.561774] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) >>> [ 4.630849] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Direct firmware load for iwlwifi-ty-a0-gf-a0-61.ucode failed with error -2 >>> [ 4.639817] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver >>> [ 4.640062] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: TLV_FW_FSEQ_VERSION: FSEQ Version: 93.8.73.28 >>> [ 4.642138] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: loaded firmware version 60.84d9abea.0 ty-a0-gf-a0-60.ucode op_mode iwlmvm >>> [ 4.760541] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Detected Intel(R) Wi-Fi 6 AX210 160MHz, REV=0x420 >>> [ 4.942350] irq/131-iwlwifi/2094 just changed the state of lock: >>> [ 4.942358] ffffa3fc07f080b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.942504] 1 lock held by irq/131-iwlwifi/2094: >>> [ 4.942511] #0: ffffa3fc0855c170 (sync_cmd_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0x47/0x100 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943219] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x208/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943242] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943264] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943289] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.943329] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.943360] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.943391] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.943424] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943446] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943467] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.943588] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943612] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943635] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943662] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.943695] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.943728] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.943760] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.943793] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943816] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943838] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.943954] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.943978] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944063] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944147] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944170] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944194] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944220] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.944255] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.944287] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.944319] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.944352] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944375] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944397] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >>> [ 4.944493] ... key at: [<ffffffffc0c2e0c0>] __key.12+0x0/0xffffffffffff0f40 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944547] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944569] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944643] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944705] CPU: 0 PID: 2094 Comm: irq/131-iwlwifi Not tainted 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210211+ #1 >>> [ 4.944786] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944825] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944847] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944878] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944949] ? iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xab/0x100 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 4.944981] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] >> >> Thanks for reporting! >> >> We made a bunch of fixes in this area and Kalle just pulled them to >> wireless-drivers-next. I believe these changes will be in tomorrow's >> linux-next. Can you retry it then? >> > I tested today's linux-next: > > The lockdep warning is still there and occurs w/o any traffic on boot. > No CI machine on your side w/ lockdep enabled? > > > [ 5.845931] ======================================================== > [ 5.845938] WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected > [ 5.845946] 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210212+ #1 Not tainted > [ 5.845954] -------------------------------------------------------- > [ 5.845961] irq/131-iwlwifi/2132 just changed the state of lock: > [ 5.845969] ffff8ca6c88600b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > [ 5.846011] but this lock took another, SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock in the past: > [ 5.846019] (napi_hash_lock){+.+.}-{2:2} > [ 5.846023] > > and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them. > > [ 5.846039] > other info that might help us debug this: > [ 5.846047] Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario: > > [ 5.846055] CPU0 CPU1 > [ 5.846061] ---- ---- > [ 5.846066] lock(napi_hash_lock); > [ 5.846074] local_irq_disable(); > [ 5.846081] lock(&rxq->lock); > [ 5.846090] lock(napi_hash_lock); > [ 5.846099] <Interrupt> > [ 5.846103] lock(&rxq->lock); > [ 5.846110] > *** DEADLOCK *** > > "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is also still there > > 0024 AX210 version is now detected. When I disable the entry I don't get a GPF > any longer but a WARN() is triggered. Not sure why a WARN() was chosen because > the call trace provides no benefit here. More helpful would be a simple > error message stating: "dev id foo: unknown dev sub id bar. Contact maintainers." > >> -- >> Cheers, >> Luca. >> > Heiner > One more comment, as I just wanted to upgrade my AX210 firmware version: Latest version in linux-firmware is 59. Seems you're at 62 already. And last but not least: The iwlwifi firmware pollutes the linux-firmware root directory. Wouldn't it be better to move all these firmware files to something like intel/iwlwifi ? Maybe for now you could leave symlinks in the root directory. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Today's linux-next iwlwifi broken 2021-02-12 14:13 ` Heiner Kallweit @ 2021-02-12 14:38 ` Sedat Dilek 2021-02-12 14:46 ` Heiner Kallweit 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Sedat Dilek @ 2021-02-12 14:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Heiner Kallweit; +Cc: Luca Coelho, linux-wireless On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 3:15 PM Heiner Kallweit <hkall@kernel.org> wrote: > > On 12.02.2021 13:21, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > > On 11.02.2021 21:23, Luca Coelho wrote: > >> On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 17:10 +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > >>> Today's linux-next has a bunch of issues, at least with my AX210 (0024) card. > >>> > >>> First I got a GPF in iwl_request_firmware(), cfg->fw_name_pre was invalid. > >>> After some digging into it I found that 6f60fb03c8e7 ("iwlwifi: move SnJ > >>> and So rules to the new tables") removed the entries for some cards. > >>> Obviously 5febcdef3090 and 9b15596c5006 weren't synced with some parallel > >>> development. > >>> After adding the entry for 0024 I now get the following lockdep warning. > >>> Isn't there any regression testing with lockdep enabled? > >>> Also warning "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is still > >>> there, IIRC we talked about this weeks ago. > >>> > >>> > >>> [ 4.561774] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) > >>> [ 4.630849] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Direct firmware load for iwlwifi-ty-a0-gf-a0-61.ucode failed with error -2 > >>> [ 4.639817] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver > >>> [ 4.640062] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: TLV_FW_FSEQ_VERSION: FSEQ Version: 93.8.73.28 > >>> [ 4.642138] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: loaded firmware version 60.84d9abea.0 ty-a0-gf-a0-60.ucode op_mode iwlmvm > >>> [ 4.760541] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Detected Intel(R) Wi-Fi 6 AX210 160MHz, REV=0x420 > >>> [ 4.942350] irq/131-iwlwifi/2094 just changed the state of lock: > >>> [ 4.942358] ffffa3fc07f080b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.942504] 1 lock held by irq/131-iwlwifi/2094: > >>> [ 4.942511] #0: ffffa3fc0855c170 (sync_cmd_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0x47/0x100 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943219] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x208/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943242] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943264] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943289] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.943329] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.943360] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.943391] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.943424] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943446] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943467] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.943588] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943612] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943635] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943662] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.943695] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.943728] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.943760] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.943793] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943816] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943838] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.943954] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.943978] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944063] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944147] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944170] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944194] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944220] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.944255] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.944287] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.944319] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.944352] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944375] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944397] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] > >>> [ 4.944493] ... key at: [<ffffffffc0c2e0c0>] __key.12+0x0/0xffffffffffff0f40 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944547] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944569] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944643] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944705] CPU: 0 PID: 2094 Comm: irq/131-iwlwifi Not tainted 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210211+ #1 > >>> [ 4.944786] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944825] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944847] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944878] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944949] ? iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xab/0x100 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 4.944981] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] > >> > >> Thanks for reporting! > >> > >> We made a bunch of fixes in this area and Kalle just pulled them to > >> wireless-drivers-next. I believe these changes will be in tomorrow's > >> linux-next. Can you retry it then? > >> > > I tested today's linux-next: > > > > The lockdep warning is still there and occurs w/o any traffic on boot. > > No CI machine on your side w/ lockdep enabled? > > > > > > [ 5.845931] ======================================================== > > [ 5.845938] WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected > > [ 5.845946] 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210212+ #1 Not tainted > > [ 5.845954] -------------------------------------------------------- > > [ 5.845961] irq/131-iwlwifi/2132 just changed the state of lock: > > [ 5.845969] ffff8ca6c88600b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > > [ 5.846011] but this lock took another, SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock in the past: > > [ 5.846019] (napi_hash_lock){+.+.}-{2:2} > > [ 5.846023] > > > > and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them. > > > > [ 5.846039] > > other info that might help us debug this: > > [ 5.846047] Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario: > > > > [ 5.846055] CPU0 CPU1 > > [ 5.846061] ---- ---- > > [ 5.846066] lock(napi_hash_lock); > > [ 5.846074] local_irq_disable(); > > [ 5.846081] lock(&rxq->lock); > > [ 5.846090] lock(napi_hash_lock); > > [ 5.846099] <Interrupt> > > [ 5.846103] lock(&rxq->lock); > > [ 5.846110] > > *** DEADLOCK *** > > > > "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is also still there > > > > 0024 AX210 version is now detected. When I disable the entry I don't get a GPF > > any longer but a WARN() is triggered. Not sure why a WARN() was chosen because > > the call trace provides no benefit here. More helpful would be a simple > > error message stating: "dev id foo: unknown dev sub id bar. Contact maintainers." > > > >> -- > >> Cheers, > >> Luca. > >> > > Heiner > > > > > One more comment, as I just wanted to upgrade my AX210 firmware version: > > Latest version in linux-firmware is 59. Seems you're at 62 already. > And last but not least: The iwlwifi firmware pollutes the linux-firmware > root directory. Wouldn't it be better to move all these firmware files > to something like intel/iwlwifi ? > Maybe for now you could leave symlinks in the root directory. > I agree with Heiner, that's something I do/did/will not like: the locations for firmware files. Here on Debian all firmware files are stored in "/lib/firmware" directory - which should be plural "firmwares" IMHO. We already have a lot of directories for vendors like "intel", "nvidia", "matrox", etc. If we move intel stuff around then please do it for intel-gfx stuff like "i915" or ucodes like "intel-ucode". I vote to move all intel stuff into a single directory called "intel" where we have sub-dirs: intel > i915 intel > iwlwifi intel > ucode (renamed from "intel-ucode") intel > e100 ... But before doing any move - this should be done for all vendors. See realtek, broadcom, amd (radeon-gfx), etc. Means collect all firmware stuff for bluetooth, wlan, ethernet, gfx etc. of a single vendor. If we do a cleanup then I vote to do this for all vendors? Dunno, who is the maintainer of linux-firmware. Guess we need to change code in the Linux sources to say "load firmware from </path/to/dirname>". ( Should be one-liners. ) For that request we should open a new thread. My €0,99 (if I would be a good guy I have written €1,00). - Sedat - ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Today's linux-next iwlwifi broken 2021-02-12 14:38 ` Sedat Dilek @ 2021-02-12 14:46 ` Heiner Kallweit 2021-02-12 14:56 ` Sedat Dilek 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Heiner Kallweit @ 2021-02-12 14:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: sedat.dilek, Josh Boyer; +Cc: Luca Coelho, linux-wireless On 12.02.2021 15:38, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 3:15 PM Heiner Kallweit <hkall@kernel.org> wrote: >> >> On 12.02.2021 13:21, Heiner Kallweit wrote: >>> On 11.02.2021 21:23, Luca Coelho wrote: >>>> On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 17:10 +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote: >>>>> Today's linux-next has a bunch of issues, at least with my AX210 (0024) card. >>>>> >>>>> First I got a GPF in iwl_request_firmware(), cfg->fw_name_pre was invalid. >>>>> After some digging into it I found that 6f60fb03c8e7 ("iwlwifi: move SnJ >>>>> and So rules to the new tables") removed the entries for some cards. >>>>> Obviously 5febcdef3090 and 9b15596c5006 weren't synced with some parallel >>>>> development. >>>>> After adding the entry for 0024 I now get the following lockdep warning. >>>>> Isn't there any regression testing with lockdep enabled? >>>>> Also warning "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is still >>>>> there, IIRC we talked about this weeks ago. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [ 4.561774] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) >>>>> [ 4.630849] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Direct firmware load for iwlwifi-ty-a0-gf-a0-61.ucode failed with error -2 >>>>> [ 4.639817] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver >>>>> [ 4.640062] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: TLV_FW_FSEQ_VERSION: FSEQ Version: 93.8.73.28 >>>>> [ 4.642138] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: loaded firmware version 60.84d9abea.0 ty-a0-gf-a0-60.ucode op_mode iwlmvm >>>>> [ 4.760541] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Detected Intel(R) Wi-Fi 6 AX210 160MHz, REV=0x420 >>>>> [ 4.942350] irq/131-iwlwifi/2094 just changed the state of lock: >>>>> [ 4.942358] ffffa3fc07f080b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.942504] 1 lock held by irq/131-iwlwifi/2094: >>>>> [ 4.942511] #0: ffffa3fc0855c170 (sync_cmd_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0x47/0x100 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943219] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x208/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943242] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943264] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943289] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.943329] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.943360] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.943391] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.943424] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943446] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943467] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.943588] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943612] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943635] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943662] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.943695] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.943728] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.943760] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.943793] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943816] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943838] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.943954] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.943978] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944063] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944147] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944170] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944194] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944220] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.944255] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.944287] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.944319] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.944352] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944375] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944397] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] >>>>> [ 4.944493] ... key at: [<ffffffffc0c2e0c0>] __key.12+0x0/0xffffffffffff0f40 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944547] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944569] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944643] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944705] CPU: 0 PID: 2094 Comm: irq/131-iwlwifi Not tainted 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210211+ #1 >>>>> [ 4.944786] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944825] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944847] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944878] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944949] ? iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xab/0x100 [iwlwifi] >>>>> [ 4.944981] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] >>>> >>>> Thanks for reporting! >>>> >>>> We made a bunch of fixes in this area and Kalle just pulled them to >>>> wireless-drivers-next. I believe these changes will be in tomorrow's >>>> linux-next. Can you retry it then? >>>> >>> I tested today's linux-next: >>> >>> The lockdep warning is still there and occurs w/o any traffic on boot. >>> No CI machine on your side w/ lockdep enabled? >>> >>> >>> [ 5.845931] ======================================================== >>> [ 5.845938] WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected >>> [ 5.845946] 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210212+ #1 Not tainted >>> [ 5.845954] -------------------------------------------------------- >>> [ 5.845961] irq/131-iwlwifi/2132 just changed the state of lock: >>> [ 5.845969] ffff8ca6c88600b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] >>> [ 5.846011] but this lock took another, SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock in the past: >>> [ 5.846019] (napi_hash_lock){+.+.}-{2:2} >>> [ 5.846023] >>> >>> and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them. >>> >>> [ 5.846039] >>> other info that might help us debug this: >>> [ 5.846047] Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario: >>> >>> [ 5.846055] CPU0 CPU1 >>> [ 5.846061] ---- ---- >>> [ 5.846066] lock(napi_hash_lock); >>> [ 5.846074] local_irq_disable(); >>> [ 5.846081] lock(&rxq->lock); >>> [ 5.846090] lock(napi_hash_lock); >>> [ 5.846099] <Interrupt> >>> [ 5.846103] lock(&rxq->lock); >>> [ 5.846110] >>> *** DEADLOCK *** >>> >>> "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is also still there >>> >>> 0024 AX210 version is now detected. When I disable the entry I don't get a GPF >>> any longer but a WARN() is triggered. Not sure why a WARN() was chosen because >>> the call trace provides no benefit here. More helpful would be a simple >>> error message stating: "dev id foo: unknown dev sub id bar. Contact maintainers." >>> >>>> -- >>>> Cheers, >>>> Luca. >>>> >>> Heiner >>> >> >> >> One more comment, as I just wanted to upgrade my AX210 firmware version: >> >> Latest version in linux-firmware is 59. Seems you're at 62 already. >> And last but not least: The iwlwifi firmware pollutes the linux-firmware >> root directory. Wouldn't it be better to move all these firmware files >> to something like intel/iwlwifi ? >> Maybe for now you could leave symlinks in the root directory. >> > > I agree with Heiner, that's something I do/did/will not like: the > locations for firmware files. > > Here on Debian all firmware files are stored in "/lib/firmware" > directory - which should be plural "firmwares" IMHO. > > We already have a lot of directories for vendors like "intel", > "nvidia", "matrox", etc. > > If we move intel stuff around then please do it for intel-gfx stuff > like "i915" or ucodes like "intel-ucode". > > I vote to move all intel stuff into a single directory called "intel" > where we have sub-dirs: > intel > i915 > intel > iwlwifi > intel > ucode (renamed from "intel-ucode") > intel > e100 > ... > > But before doing any move - this should be done for all vendors. > See realtek, broadcom, amd (radeon-gfx), etc. > Means collect all firmware stuff for bluetooth, wlan, ethernet, gfx > etc. of a single vendor. > > If we do a cleanup then I vote to do this for all vendors? > > Dunno, who is the maintainer of linux-firmware. > Guess we need to change code in the Linux sources to say "load > firmware from </path/to/dirname>". > ( Should be one-liners. ) > > For that request we should open a new thread. > > My €0,99 (if I would be a good guy I have written €1,00). > > - Sedat - > +Josh for linux-firmware ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Today's linux-next iwlwifi broken 2021-02-12 14:46 ` Heiner Kallweit @ 2021-02-12 14:56 ` Sedat Dilek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Sedat Dilek @ 2021-02-12 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Heiner Kallweit; +Cc: Josh Boyer, Luca Coelho, linux-wireless On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 3:46 PM Heiner Kallweit <hkall@kernel.org> wrote: > > On 12.02.2021 15:38, Sedat Dilek wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 3:15 PM Heiner Kallweit <hkall@kernel.org> wrote: > >> > >> On 12.02.2021 13:21, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > >>> On 11.02.2021 21:23, Luca Coelho wrote: > >>>> On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 17:10 +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > >>>>> Today's linux-next has a bunch of issues, at least with my AX210 (0024) card. > >>>>> > >>>>> First I got a GPF in iwl_request_firmware(), cfg->fw_name_pre was invalid. > >>>>> After some digging into it I found that 6f60fb03c8e7 ("iwlwifi: move SnJ > >>>>> and So rules to the new tables") removed the entries for some cards. > >>>>> Obviously 5febcdef3090 and 9b15596c5006 weren't synced with some parallel > >>>>> development. > >>>>> After adding the entry for 0024 I now get the following lockdep warning. > >>>>> Isn't there any regression testing with lockdep enabled? > >>>>> Also warning "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is still > >>>>> there, IIRC we talked about this weeks ago. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> [ 4.561774] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) > >>>>> [ 4.630849] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Direct firmware load for iwlwifi-ty-a0-gf-a0-61.ucode failed with error -2 > >>>>> [ 4.639817] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver > >>>>> [ 4.640062] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: TLV_FW_FSEQ_VERSION: FSEQ Version: 93.8.73.28 > >>>>> [ 4.642138] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: loaded firmware version 60.84d9abea.0 ty-a0-gf-a0-60.ucode op_mode iwlmvm > >>>>> [ 4.760541] iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Detected Intel(R) Wi-Fi 6 AX210 160MHz, REV=0x420 > >>>>> [ 4.942350] irq/131-iwlwifi/2094 just changed the state of lock: > >>>>> [ 4.942358] ffffa3fc07f080b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.942504] 1 lock held by irq/131-iwlwifi/2094: > >>>>> [ 4.942511] #0: ffffa3fc0855c170 (sync_cmd_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0x47/0x100 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943219] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x208/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943242] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943264] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943289] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.943329] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.943360] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.943391] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.943424] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943446] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943467] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.943588] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943612] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943635] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943662] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.943695] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.943728] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.943760] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.943793] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943816] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943838] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.943954] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.943978] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944063] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944147] _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x140/0x6e0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944170] iwl_pcie_gen2_rx_init+0x20/0x30 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944194] iwl_trans_pcie_gen2_start_fw+0x1e3/0x350 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944220] iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0xfc/0x440 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.944255] iwl_run_unified_mvm_ucode+0xa5/0x250 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.944287] iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0x292/0x370 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.944319] iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x7f4/0xb60 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.944352] _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.0+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944375] iwl_opmode_register+0x70/0xe0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944397] iwl_mvm_init+0x35/0x1000 [iwlmvm] > >>>>> [ 4.944493] ... key at: [<ffffffffc0c2e0c0>] __key.12+0x0/0xffffffffffff0f40 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944547] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944569] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944643] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944705] CPU: 0 PID: 2094 Comm: irq/131-iwlwifi Not tainted 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210211+ #1 > >>>>> [ 4.944786] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944825] ? iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944847] iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944878] iwl_pcie_napi_poll_msix+0x2a/0x90 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944949] ? iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xab/0x100 [iwlwifi] > >>>>> [ 4.944981] iwl_pcie_irq_rx_msix_handler+0xbc/0x100 [iwlwifi] > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for reporting! > >>>> > >>>> We made a bunch of fixes in this area and Kalle just pulled them to > >>>> wireless-drivers-next. I believe these changes will be in tomorrow's > >>>> linux-next. Can you retry it then? > >>>> > >>> I tested today's linux-next: > >>> > >>> The lockdep warning is still there and occurs w/o any traffic on boot. > >>> No CI machine on your side w/ lockdep enabled? > >>> > >>> > >>> [ 5.845931] ======================================================== > >>> [ 5.845938] WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected > >>> [ 5.845946] 5.11.0-rc7-next-20210212+ #1 Not tainted > >>> [ 5.845954] -------------------------------------------------------- > >>> [ 5.845961] irq/131-iwlwifi/2132 just changed the state of lock: > >>> [ 5.845969] ffff8ca6c88600b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7c/0x8b0 [iwlwifi] > >>> [ 5.846011] but this lock took another, SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock in the past: > >>> [ 5.846019] (napi_hash_lock){+.+.}-{2:2} > >>> [ 5.846023] > >>> > >>> and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them. > >>> > >>> [ 5.846039] > >>> other info that might help us debug this: > >>> [ 5.846047] Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario: > >>> > >>> [ 5.846055] CPU0 CPU1 > >>> [ 5.846061] ---- ---- > >>> [ 5.846066] lock(napi_hash_lock); > >>> [ 5.846074] local_irq_disable(); > >>> [ 5.846081] lock(&rxq->lock); > >>> [ 5.846090] lock(napi_hash_lock); > >>> [ 5.846099] <Interrupt> > >>> [ 5.846103] lock(&rxq->lock); > >>> [ 5.846110] > >>> *** DEADLOCK *** > >>> > >>> "api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver" is also still there > >>> > >>> 0024 AX210 version is now detected. When I disable the entry I don't get a GPF > >>> any longer but a WARN() is triggered. Not sure why a WARN() was chosen because > >>> the call trace provides no benefit here. More helpful would be a simple > >>> error message stating: "dev id foo: unknown dev sub id bar. Contact maintainers." > >>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Luca. > >>>> > >>> Heiner > >>> > >> > >> > >> One more comment, as I just wanted to upgrade my AX210 firmware version: > >> > >> Latest version in linux-firmware is 59. Seems you're at 62 already. > >> And last but not least: The iwlwifi firmware pollutes the linux-firmware > >> root directory. Wouldn't it be better to move all these firmware files > >> to something like intel/iwlwifi ? > >> Maybe for now you could leave symlinks in the root directory. > >> > > > > I agree with Heiner, that's something I do/did/will not like: the > > locations for firmware files. > > > > Here on Debian all firmware files are stored in "/lib/firmware" > > directory - which should be plural "firmwares" IMHO. > > > > We already have a lot of directories for vendors like "intel", > > "nvidia", "matrox", etc. > > > > If we move intel stuff around then please do it for intel-gfx stuff > > like "i915" or ucodes like "intel-ucode". > > > > I vote to move all intel stuff into a single directory called "intel" > > where we have sub-dirs: > > intel > i915 > > intel > iwlwifi > > intel > ucode (renamed from "intel-ucode") > > intel > e100 > > ... > > > > But before doing any move - this should be done for all vendors. > > See realtek, broadcom, amd (radeon-gfx), etc. > > Means collect all firmware stuff for bluetooth, wlan, ethernet, gfx > > etc. of a single vendor. > > > > If we do a cleanup then I vote to do this for all vendors? > > > > Dunno, who is the maintainer of linux-firmware. > > Guess we need to change code in the Linux sources to say "load > > firmware from </path/to/dirname>". > > ( Should be one-liners. ) > > > > For that request we should open a new thread. > > > > My €0,99 (if I would be a good guy I have written €1,00). > > > > - Sedat - > > > > +Josh for linux-firmware Thanks. Some more ideas but cannot say this is more overhead than helpful: <vendor_name>/<hw_cat_short>/<driver_name> With hw_cat_short I mean: "bth" short for bluetooth "eth" short for ethernet "wifi" for wireless-lan "gfx" for graphics etc. If vendors have multiple wifi device "families" thinking of realtek for example. Some brainstorming... Hey, I found one cent :-)... - Sedat - ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-02-12 14:57 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2021-02-11 16:10 Today's linux-next iwlwifi broken Heiner Kallweit 2021-02-11 20:23 ` Luca Coelho 2021-02-11 21:41 ` Heiner Kallweit 2021-02-12 12:21 ` Heiner Kallweit 2021-02-12 14:13 ` Heiner Kallweit 2021-02-12 14:38 ` Sedat Dilek 2021-02-12 14:46 ` Heiner Kallweit 2021-02-12 14:56 ` Sedat Dilek
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.