day, July 21, 2020 7:03 AM
> >> To: Kalle Valo
> >> Cc: Brian Norris ; Doug Anderson
> >> ; linux-wireless >> wirel...@vger.kernel.org>; Rakesh Pillai ; ath10k
> >> ; LKML
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: Add interrupt summary based CE proc
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 6:32 PM Peter Oh wrote:
>
> I'll take my word back.
> It's not this patch problem, but by others.
> I have 2 extra patches before the 3 patches so my system looks like
>
> backports from ath.git 5.6-rc1 + linux kernel 4.4 (similar to OpenWrt)
> On top of the working
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Oh
> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2020 7:03 AM
> To: Kalle Valo
> Cc: Brian Norris ; Doug Anderson
> ; linux-wireless wirel...@vger.kernel.org>; Rakesh Pillai ; ath10k
> ; LKML
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: Add interrupt
I'll take my word back.
It's not this patch problem, but by others.
I have 2 extra patches before the 3 patches so my system looks like
backports from ath.git 5.6-rc1 + linux kernel 4.4 (similar to OpenWrt)
On top of the working system, I cherry-picked these 5.
#1.
ath10k: Avoid override CE5
My previous email wasn't sent out.
At first I gave these 3 patches.
ath10k: Add interrupt summary based CE processing
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11628299/
ath10k: Keep track of which interrupts fired, don't poll them
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11654631/
ath10k: Get rid of
Since IPQ4019 doesn't support per CE based interrupt summary, I doubt
if this change is correct.
+ ath10k_ce_engine_int_status_clear(ar, ctrl_addr,
+ wm_regs->cc_mask | wm_regs->wm_mask);
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 5:53 PM Peter Oh wrote:
>
> At first
I've run 3 units and one of them happens the problem always while the
other 2 are barely happening.
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 5:33 PM Peter Oh wrote:
>
> I'm getting this panic on IPQ4019 system after cherry-picked this
> single patch on top of working system.
>
> [ 14.226184] ath10k_ahb
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 5:33 PM Peter Oh wrote:
>
> I'm getting this panic on IPQ4019 system after cherry-picked this
> single patch on top of working system.
>
> [ 14.226184] ath10k_ahb a00.wifi: failed to receive initialized
> event from target: 8000
A bit of a shot in the dark,
I'm getting this panic on IPQ4019 system after cherry-picked this
single patch on top of working system.
[ 14.226184] ath10k_ahb a00.wifi: failed to receive initialized
event from target: 8000
[ 14.326406] !#% P
L F<005> [0008]
[ 14.326447] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer
Brian Norris writes:
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:49 PM Doug Anderson wrote:
>> I should also note that, while I'm not terribly familiar with Kalle's
>> workflow, I would have expected to see him in the "To:" list. I've
>> added him, but it's possible he'll need you to repost the patch with
>>
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:49 PM Doug Anderson wrote:
> I should also note that, while I'm not terribly familiar with Kalle's
> workflow, I would have expected to see him in the "To:" list. I've
> added him, but it's possible he'll need you to repost the patch with
> him in the "To:" list.
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:37 PM Doug Anderson wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 10:53 AM Rakesh Pillai wrote:
> >
> > Currently the NAPI processing loops through all
> > the copy engines and processes a particular copy
> > engine is the copy completion is set for that copy
> >
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 10:53 AM Rakesh Pillai wrote:
>
> Currently the NAPI processing loops through all
> the copy engines and processes a particular copy
> engine is the copy completion is set for that copy
> engine. The host driver is not supposed to access
> any copy engine register
Currently the NAPI processing loops through all
the copy engines and processes a particular copy
engine is the copy completion is set for that copy
engine. The host driver is not supposed to access
any copy engine register after clearing the interrupt
status register.
This might result in kernel
14 matches
Mail list logo
