On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:55:05AM +0100, Jan Schreiber wrote:
> On 02/27/18 09:06, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 11:55:34PM +0100, j...@posteo.de wrote:
> >> When connecting to a wifi network messages like "iwm0: unhandled firmware
> >> response 0xff/0xb8000010 rx ring" appear.
> >> After looking at https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9869017/ I came up with
> >> following patch.
> >> The link also explains what is happening.
> >
> > Thanks for this!
> >
> >> I'm not sure if it makes sense to log the firmware responses like the linux
> >> kernel does.
> >> They don't appear to have any negative effect so I decided against it.
> >
> > Agreed. There is no point in logging this.
> >
> > There are two problems with your diff:
> >
> > The first is that somehow it got corrupted (whitespace got mangled, lines
> > got wrapped which shouldn't have been). Please check your mailer settings.
> > Tip: You can mail a diff to yourself and then try to apply it until you've
> > figured out how to make your mail client work right. I've quoted the diff
> > I received below as-is, so if you save this mail body and feed it into
> > patch(1) you will see what problems I saw.
> > In this particular instance it's not a huge burden because the diff adds
> > just 3 lines, but I basically had to rewrite your patch from scratch to
> > apply it, which is no fun, especially for larger diffs.
>
> Sorry for that. Seems my config was eaten. Again.
This new diff is still broken (looks like tabs got converted to spaces)?
You obviously didn't try to send a diff to yourself first :(
I am just going to apply it manually now. But please invest time into
fixing this properly before submitting any more diffs.
For every diff you send out there is a potential amount of N people who will
try to test it. Problems like this are just distracting and a waste of time
for anyone volunteering some of their own time to try to help you.
Regardless, I am very grateful for the work you did in tracking this down.
This has been a long-standing problem and you've provided the missing link
to information which allowed us to understand why it happened.
|diff --git sys/dev/pci/if_iwm.c sys/dev/pci/if_iwm.c
|index 476c61f0b3d..af3eeb76978 100644
|--- sys/dev/pci/if_iwm.c
|+++ sys/dev/pci/if_iwm.c
--------------------------
Patching file if_iwm.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 7316.
1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to if_iwm.c.rej
Hmm... The next patch looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|diff --git sys/dev/pci/if_iwmreg.h sys/dev/pci/if_iwmreg.h
|index 3c5cfea7b23..06eef017015 100644
|--- sys/dev/pci/if_iwmreg.h
|+++ sys/dev/pci/if_iwmreg.h
--------------------------
Patching file if_iwmreg.h using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 1813.
Hunk #2 failed at 5823.
2 out of 2 hunks failed--saving rejects to if_iwmreg.h.rej
Hmm... Ignoring the trailing garbage.
done
> > The next problem: You're catching this notification in a case block which
> > handles commands we expect to get a response for, but we don't even want
> > to parse the data contained in this notification.
> > I think it would be better to move it to a different case: block which just
> > does a 'break;'. There should be some of those already so you could add it
> > there, or you could introduce a new case: block, whichever you prefer.
>
> I moved the catch which is marked as ignored. Thanks for the review!
>
> diff --git sys/dev/pci/if_iwm.c sys/dev/pci/if_iwm.c
> index 476c61f0b3d..af3eeb76978 100644
> --- sys/dev/pci/if_iwm.c
> +++ sys/dev/pci/if_iwm.c
> @@ -7316,6 +7316,10 @@ iwm_notif_intr(struct iwm_softc *sc)
> break;
> }
>
> + case IWM_WIDE_ID(IWM_SYSTEM_GROUP,
> + IWM_FSEQ_VER_MISMATCH_NOTIFICATION):
> + break;
> +
> /*
> * Firmware versions 21 and 22 generate some DEBUG_LOG_MSG
> * messages. Just ignore them for now.
> diff --git sys/dev/pci/if_iwmreg.h sys/dev/pci/if_iwmreg.h
> index 3c5cfea7b23..06eef017015 100644
> --- sys/dev/pci/if_iwmreg.h
> +++ sys/dev/pci/if_iwmreg.h
> @@ -1813,6 +1813,9 @@ struct iwm_agn_scd_bc_tbl {
> #define IWM_NET_DETECT_HOTSPOTS_CMD 0x58
> #define IWM_NET_DETECT_HOTSPOTS_QUERY_CMD 0x59
>
> +/* system group command IDs */
> +#define IWM_FSEQ_VER_MISMATCH_NOTIFICATION 0xff
> +
> #define IWM_REPLY_MAX 0xff
>
> /**
> @@ -5820,6 +5823,7 @@ iwm_cmd_id(uint8_t opcode, uint8_t groupid, uint8_t
> version)
>
> /* due to the conversion, this group is special */
> #define IWM_ALWAYS_LONG_GROUP 1
> +#define IWM_SYSTEM_GROUP 4
>
> struct iwm_cmd_header {
> uint8_t code;
>
