From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de [80.237.130.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBC601855 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 11:51:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ip4d144895.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([77.20.72.149] helo=[192.168.66.200]); authenticated by wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) id 1nTjEh-0007qV-8Z; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 12:51:39 +0100 Message-ID: <915d6d66-4e42-8cbf-76bc-0f2f72d5e7d6@leemhuis.info> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2022 12:51:38 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: regressions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Content-Language: en-US To: golan.ben.ami@intel.com, Luca Coelho Cc: Udo Steinberg , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "regressions@lists.linux.dev" From: Thorsten Leemhuis Subject: Bug 215635 - iwlwifi: Firmware crash with firmware 36.ca7b901d.0 (8265-36.ucode) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;regressions@leemhuis.info;1647258701;498cc002; X-HE-SMSGID: 1nTjEh-0007qV-8Z Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker. I noticed a regression report in bugzilla.kernel.org that afaics isn't properly handled, that's why I decided to forward it to the lists and a few relevant people to the CC. To quote from https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215635 : > Seeing the following firmware crash frequently with > firmware-version: 36.ca7b901d.0 8265-36.ucode > > [...] > > Afterwards iwlwifi is entirely unusable, i.e. the hardware does not recover. > I have not been able to observe the problem with 5.15.x so far. > > The problem manifests either by Wi-Fi becoming entirely unresponsive (not even ping to gateway works anymore) or by producing a firmware crash. > > In response to #3, the problem was most recently observed as a firmware crash on Linux 5.16.13. HW is Intel Corporation Wireless 8265 / 8275 (rev 78) (Windstorm Peak) and firmware version 36.ca7b901d.0 8265-36.ucode. > > I'm attaching the dmesg output from 5.16.13 (with the TWT patch mentioned above applied) which includes a firmware crash. Could somebody take a look into this? Or was this discussed somewhere else already? Or even fixed? Anyway, to get this tracked: #regzbot introduced: v5.15..v5.16 #regzbot from: Udo Steinberg #regzbot title: wireless: iwlwifi: Firmware crash frequently with firmware 36.ca7b901d.0 (8265-36.ucode) #regzbot link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215635 Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat) P.S.: As the Linux kernel's regression tracker I'm getting a lot of reports on my table. I can only look briefly into most of them and lack knowledge about most of the areas they concern. I thus unfortunately will sometimes get things wrong or miss something important. I hope that's not the case here; if you think it is, don't hesitate to tell me in a public reply, it's in everyone's interest to set the public record straight. -- Additional information about regzbot: If you want to know more about regzbot, check out its web-interface, the getting start guide, and the references documentation: https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/regzbot/ https://gitlab.com/knurd42/regzbot/-/blob/main/docs/getting_started.md https://gitlab.com/knurd42/regzbot/-/blob/main/docs/reference.md The last two documents will explain how you can interact with regzbot yourself if your want to. Hint for reporters: when reporting a regression it's in your interest to CC the regression list and tell regzbot about the issue, as that ensures the regression makes it onto the radar of the Linux kernel's regression tracker -- that's in your interest, as it ensures your report won't fall through the cracks unnoticed. Hint for developers: you normally don't need to care about regzbot once it's involved. Fix the issue as you normally would, just remember to include 'Link:' tag in the patch descriptions pointing to all reports about the issue. This has been expected from developers even before regzbot showed up for reasons explained in 'Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst' and 'Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst'.