Re: [PATCH] HID: logitech-hidpp: Handle timeout differently from busy - Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)

From: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"  <regressions@leemhuis.info>
To: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>, Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net>
Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Benjamin Tissoires" <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>,
	"Peter F . Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>,
	"Filipe Laíns" <lains@riseup.net>,
	"Nestor Lopez Casado" <nlopezcasad@logitech.com>,
	"Mark Lord" <mlord@pobox.com>,
	"Linux kernel regressions list" <regressions@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: logitech-hidpp: Handle timeout differently from busy
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2023 10:44:09 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <15bb2507-a145-7f1b-8e84-58aeb02484b9@leemhuis.info> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.2306031440380.29760@cbobk.fhfr.pm>

On 03.06.23 14:41, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 31 May 2023, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> 
>>> If an attempt at contacting a receiver or a device fails because the
>>> receiver or device never responds, don't restart the communication, only
>>> restart it if the receiver or device answers that it's busy, as originally
>>> intended.
>>>
>>> This was the behaviour on communication timeout before commit 586e8fede795
>>> ("HID: logitech-hidpp: Retry commands when device is busy").
>>>
>>> This fixes some overly long waits in a critical path on boot, when
>>> checking whether the device is connected by getting its HID++ version.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net>
>>> Suggested-by: Mark Lord <mlord@pobox.com>
>>> Fixes: 586e8fede795 ("HID: logitech-hidpp: Retry commands when device is busy")
>>> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217412
> [...]  
>>
>> I have applied this even before getting confirmation from the reporters in 
>> bugzilla, as it's the right thing to do anyway.
> 
> Unfortunately it doesn't seem to cure the reported issue (while reverting 
> 586e8fede79 does):

BTW, remind me again: was fixing this by reverting 586e8fede79 for now a
option? I guess it's not, but if I'm wrong I wonder if that might at
this point be the best way forward.

> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217523#c2

FWIW, another comment showed up there:

```
> --- Comment #6 from vova7890 ---
> Same problem. I researched this some time ago. I noticed that if I add a small
> delay between commands to the dongle - everything goes fine. Repeated
> request(586e8fede7953b1695b5ccc6112eff9b052e79ac) made the situation more
> visible
```

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
If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page.

#regzbot ^backmonitor:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/15e5d50f-95fc-c7c9-0918-015f24c6fc6d@leemhuis.info/