From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FFC8C47404 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 10:02:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02241215EA for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 10:02:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="QMWp6/G+" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730744AbfJDKCT (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Oct 2019 06:02:19 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f51.google.com ([209.85.166.51]:36262 "EHLO mail-io1-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726927AbfJDKCS (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Oct 2019 06:02:18 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f51.google.com with SMTP id b136so12272048iof.3; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 03:02:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=zVzaL13aBMw0U8JG2NOEmJnjPxX8zMVFzGvL8Tcw4zE=; b=QMWp6/G+6FQ1g1EQynFBy9qWtAZZvbEl3vOY2ZedehHYyxKZxM/Eonl4lW4ykcXIC9 3kiJdmKWs3Q8Z/0PPZNV7FfF+lkzhC7tyZp5I3lgBnlk2/dx0jCtyxFuUP4Kq3q+UaV9 j2zrTEBpydXkC24ZBOnRVqg8olG2y1m5ntg+ouIBV18wnKLvdHTJ1aSe0LOrqXlPBRMg foVktVWwiAPyFKX202xdxFE1O3kdUG2v59sGkmod4c92aICgMbdfr3t/6fwCY/60fxD/ XUFu2W2PvCyn4JFcZUizrR5n4vGtTn3UgiVAkGHeJMU2jVoSr8F2M0+F6HsBwLf42ngb vg8Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=zVzaL13aBMw0U8JG2NOEmJnjPxX8zMVFzGvL8Tcw4zE=; b=Pa8Iea1+rBsZKbGTf2sy8N82+lgIjLJVCeZQ6SpiG2DyyDZrua0XQS3pXYN+xhIGBW anSqK1hTFzrgH6XOYqdOLzxor+T+G4MMfdLj3NLmNrUzNUaDmaGJXJ2HBOi8nkCphU8M lkkkLrGy98NSEMelfwqdTWg0gNQuCYPAv26BERjsV0Qe365BuEpI5glcfkYG5faA4jty j/9MxbNtnUygAr7nC726icOXNZn4Ghvf3FnrK7GFKteLE570gDcs4vYMgr1K4XuWk+ib poh+u1biin+Pd3/Jys4dbtXvmLcgidH8OJ5ex5F6tZD8Uv+pmChLO/I2mE9R5ToGZCKc bSLw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWGzyOPD1jUVqhW0ofvcmcKB1kW7uRiPc68mekQ8+LUUI7G6bot 3Ery/jKeKLEoGyO2Vx69AgUV+s3lR6/zoGjwXIY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzMrdeHLGJcpBa6sb2EAlzKy/w8w1xOVCGpGNdUkhtzyFrrOpSnqNRE8cnlYFCtBJxxnh89exYjDJhjAyKlo4M= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:3a5:: with SMTP id z5mr13854093jap.95.1570183337214; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 03:02:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Adam Ford Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 05:02:05 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: DM3730 Bluetooth Performance differences between SERIAL_8250_OMAP vs SERIAL_OMAP To: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux-OMAP , Vignesh R Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I am running Kernel 5.3.2 trying to troubleshoot some intermittent Bluetooth issues, and I think I have narrowed it down to the serial driver in use. By default, omap2plus_defconfig enables both SERIAL_8250_OMAP and SERIAL_OMAP. I have my console device configured as ttyS0, and all appears fine. When I enable Bluetooth, however, I get intermittent errors on an DM3730 / OMAP3630. Using the 8250 driver for Blueotooth I get intermittent frame errors and data loss. Scanning ... [ 28.482452] Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-84) [ 36.162170] Bluetooth: hci0: Frame reassembly failed (-84) F4:4E:FC:C9:2F:57 BluJax # l2ping F4:4E:FC:C9:2F:57 Ping: F4:4E:FC:C9:2F:57 from 00:18:30:49:7D:63 (data size 44) ... 44 bytes from F4:4E:FC:C9:2F:57 id 0 time 8.27ms no response from F4:4E:FC:C9:2F:57: id 1 ^C2 sent, 1 received, 50% loss (after a fairly long hang, I hit control-c) However, disabling the 8250 driver and using the only SERIAL_OMAP and the console routed to ttyO0, the Bluetooth works well, so I believe it to be a serial driver issue and not a Bluetooth error. # hcitool scan Scanning ... F4:4E:FC:C9:2F:57 BluJax ^C # l2ping F4:4E:FC:C9:2F:57 Ping: F4:4E:FC:C9:2F:57 from 00:18:30:49:7D:63 (data size 44) ... 44 bytes from F4:4E:FC:C9:2F:57 id 0 time 6.90ms ... 44 bytes from F4:4E:FC:C9:2F:57 id 14 time 28.29ms ^C15 sent, 15 received, 0% loss # 0% loss and regular, repeatable communication without any Frame reassembly errors. Any suggestions on how to troubleshoot or what might cause the difference between the two drivers? adam