Re: [regression] Bug 217069 - Wake on Lan is broken on r8169 since 6.2

From: Jianmin Lv <lvjianmin@loongson.cn>
To: Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@lists.linux.dev>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@loongson.cn>,
	Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>,
	acpica-devel@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [regression] Bug 217069 - Wake on Lan is broken on r8169 since 6.2
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2023 20:35:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <754225a2-95a9-2c36-1886-7da1a78308c2@loongson.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13aea525-108a-e018-987d-2447ff1d42df@leemhuis.info>

 From the feedbacks, the WOL issue has been fixed, and I have submitted 
a fixed patch to ACPICA, which has been reviewing in last week (Rafael 
also looked into the fixed patch).

There are two kinds of issues in the bug, one is WOL failed in kexec 
reboot, another is WOL failed in cold reboot. The former one still exist 
after reverted patch(5c62d5aab8752e5ee7bfbe75ed6060db1c787f98),
so this issue is not caused by the reverted patch. The second is caused 
by the reverted patch, and has been fixed with my provided patch.

Please see:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217069#c54
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217069#c59

Thanks.

On 2023/4/14 下午8:48, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 19.03.23 08:20, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>> On 22.02.23 08:57, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>>
>>> I noticed a regression report in bugzilla.kernel.org. As many (most?)
>>> kernel developer don't keep an eye on it, I decided to forward it by
>>> mail. Quoting from https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217069 :
>>
>> An issue that looked like a network bug was now bisected and it turns
>> out it's cause by 5c62d5aab875 ("ACPICA: Events: Support fixed PCIe wake
>> event") which Huacai Chen provided. Could you take a look at the ticket
>> linked above?
> 
> Jianmin did get close to a proper fix a while ago
> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217069#c46 ), but it
> appears there wasn't any progress to fix this during the last week. Or
> did I miss it?
> 
> This is kinda unsatisfying, as the culprit is now known for nearly four
> weeks; especially as this is a issue that is present in 6.2 since it was
> released and would have been possible to fix there and in mainline with
> a simple revert. We even got close to one two weeks ago already
> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217069#c49 ).
> 
> #sigh
> 
> I'd say we should revert this. Rafael, what's your opinion here?
> 
> 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 poke
> 