Re: WLAN broken on Nokia N900 with v6.2-rc1

["Linux kernel regression tracking (#update)" <regressions@leemhuis.info>]

On 11.01.23 17:49, Alexander Wetzel wrote:
> For regression tracking only:
> 
> +CC regressions@lists.linux.dev
> 
> Issue is solved with a patch already on the way into mainline.
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?h=next-20230111&id=4444bc2116aecdcde87dce80373540adc8bd478b
> 
> Issue was found and fixed independently of the regression report, so no
> regression tags in the commit.

Happens, thx for letting me know. Now regzbot will know about it as well:

#regzbot fix: wifi: mac80211: Proper mark iTXQs for resumption

Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
--
Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking:
https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr
That page also explains what to do if mails like this annoy you.

> On 11.01.23 17:21, Alexander Wetzel wrote:
>> On 10.01.23 20:08, Sicelo wrote:
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 07:59:24PM +0100, Alexander Wetzel wrote:
>>>> Should have seen the potential sooner, but can you please check if the
>>>> following patch fixes the issue?
>>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/20221230121850.218810-1-alexander@wetzel-home.de/
>>>>
>>>> This patch seems to be a perfect fit to what you are describing...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, someone pointed me to this patch a day ago, and it does fix the
>>> issue indeed.
>>>
>>> Apologies for not responding sooner.
>>>
>> That was fast:-)
>> Thanks for testing and reporting back.
>>
>>>> FYI:
>>>> There is another regression report which has that as a very likely
>>>> but not
>>>> yet confirmed fix:
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/7cff27f8-d363-bbfb-241e-8d6fc0009c40@leemhuis.info/T/#t
>>>>
>>>> (The discussion above has another patch you really want to have when
>>>> AMPDU
>>>> is supported.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I will give this a try as well during the course of the week. I noticed
>>> the speeds were low, but that could just be the weak hardware itself
>>> (1x600MHz ARM CPU), and I have not had time to compare performance from
>>> before the commits in question.
>>
>> Please keep me posted on the outcome. I expect no relevant change but
>> then I did not test the patch on weak HW so far...
>>
>> Alexander
>>
>>
> 
> 
>