Hi Brian,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ganapathi Bhat
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 12:47 PM
> To: 'Brian Norris'
> Cc: Kalle Valo; [email protected]; Cathy Luo; Xinming Hu;
> Zhiyuan Yang; James Cao; Mangesh Malusare; Shrenik Shikhare
> Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [2/2] mwifiex: use more_rx_task_flag to avoid USB RX
> stall
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian Norris [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 12:04 AM
> > To: Ganapathi Bhat
> > Cc: Kalle Valo; [email protected]; Cathy Luo; Xinming Hu;
> > Zhiyuan Yang; James Cao; Mangesh Malusare; Shrenik Shikhare
> > Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [2/2] mwifiex: use more_rx_task_flag to avoid
> > USB RX stall
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 09:59:04AM +0000, Ganapathi Bhat wrote:
> > > > I can't find any commit with id c7dbdcb2a4e1, is it correct?
> > > Correct. Actually the commit id c7dbdcb2a4e1 is the PATCH [1/2] sent
> > > in this
> > series.
> >
> > What? Why would you introduce a bug and only fix it in the next patch?
> With the first patch the original issue took considerably longer time to
> recreate. Also it followed a different path to get recreated(shared in commit
> message).
> > Does that mean you should just combine the two?
> Let us know if that is fine to merge them. We can modify the commit
> message accordingly.
> > Or reverse the order, if patch 2 doesn't cause problems on its own?
> Patch 2 has a dependency on patch 1.
One correction. There is no commit dependency between patch 1 and 2(they can be applied in any order). But the result would be same. We need both fixes. Let us know if we can combine them.
> >
> > Brian
>
> Regards,
> Ganapathi
Regards,
Ganapathi
Hi,
On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 11:19 PM, Ganapathi Bhat <[email protected]> wrote:
>> From: Ganapathi Bhat
>> > From: Brian Norris [mailto:[email protected]]
>> > On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 09:59:04AM +0000, Ganapathi Bhat wrote:
>> > > > I can't find any commit with id c7dbdcb2a4e1, is it correct?
>> > > Correct. Actually the commit id c7dbdcb2a4e1 is the PATCH [1/2] sent
>> > > in this
>> > series.
>> >
>> > What? Why would you introduce a bug and only fix it in the next patch?
>> With the first patch the original issue took considerably longer time to
>> recreate. Also it followed a different path to get recreated(shared in commit
>> message).
>> > Does that mean you should just combine the two?
>> Let us know if that is fine to merge them. We can modify the commit
>> message accordingly.
>> > Or reverse the order, if patch 2 doesn't cause problems on its own?
>> Patch 2 has a dependency on patch 1.
> One correction. There is no commit dependency between patch 1 and 2(they can be applied in any order). But the result would be same. We need both fixes. Let us know if we can combine them.
I haven't closely looked at patch 2 yet. My only statement was that it
makes no sense to have 2 commits, with the second one labeled as
"Fixing" the first one. From your descriptions, it sounds like patch 2
should actually come first, but I'm not really sure. I only looked far
enough to say that I didn't like patch 1 as-is :)
Brian
SGkgQnJpYW4sDQoNCj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4gRnJvbTogQnJpYW4g
Tm9ycmlzIFttYWlsdG86YnJpYW5ub3JyaXNAY2hyb21pdW0ub3JnXQ0KPiBTZW50OiBUdWVzZGF5
LCBKYW51YXJ5IDMwLCAyMDE4IDM6MzggQU0NCj4gVG86IEdhbmFwYXRoaSBCaGF0DQo+IENjOiBL
YWxsZSBWYWxvOyBsaW51eC13aXJlbGVzc0B2Z2VyLmtlcm5lbC5vcmc7IENhdGh5IEx1bzsgWGlu
bWluZyBIdTsNCj4gWmhpeXVhbiBZYW5nOyBKYW1lcyBDYW87IE1hbmdlc2ggTWFsdXNhcmU7IFNo
cmVuaWsgU2hpa2hhcmUNCj4gU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFtFWFRdIFJlOiBbMi8yXSBtd2lmaWV4OiB1
c2UgbW9yZV9yeF90YXNrX2ZsYWcgdG8gYXZvaWQgVVNCIFJYDQo+IHN0YWxsDQo+DQo+IEhpLA0K
Pg0KPiBPbiBTdW4sIEphbiAyOCwgMjAxOCBhdCAxMToxOSBQTSwgR2FuYXBhdGhpIEJoYXQgPGdi
aGF0QG1hcnZlbGwuY29tPg0KPiB3cm90ZToNCj4gPj4gRnJvbTogR2FuYXBhdGhpIEJoYXQNCj4g
Pj4gPiBGcm9tOiBCcmlhbiBOb3JyaXMgW21haWx0bzpicmlhbm5vcnJpc0BjaHJvbWl1bS5vcmdd
IE9uIFRodSwgSmFuDQo+ID4+ID4gMjUsIDIwMTggYXQgMDk6NTk6MDRBTSArMDAwMCwgR2FuYXBh
dGhpIEJoYXQgd3JvdGU6DQo+ID4+ID4gPiA+IEkgY2FuJ3QgZmluZCBhbnkgY29tbWl0IHdpdGgg
aWQgYzdkYmRjYjJhNGUxLCBpcyBpdCBjb3JyZWN0Pw0KPiA+PiA+ID4gQ29ycmVjdC4gQWN0dWFs
bHkgdGhlIGNvbW1pdCBpZCBjN2RiZGNiMmE0ZTEgaXMgdGhlIFBBVENIIFsxLzJdDQo+ID4+ID4g
PiBzZW50IGluIHRoaXMNCj4gPj4gPiBzZXJpZXMuDQo+ID4+ID4NCj4gPj4gPiBXaGF0PyBXaHkg
d291bGQgeW91IGludHJvZHVjZSBhIGJ1ZyBhbmQgb25seSBmaXggaXQgaW4gdGhlIG5leHQgcGF0
Y2g/DQo+ID4+IFdpdGggdGhlIGZpcnN0IHBhdGNoIHRoZSBvcmlnaW5hbCBpc3N1ZSB0b29rIGNv
bnNpZGVyYWJseSBsb25nZXIgdGltZQ0KPiA+PiB0byByZWNyZWF0ZS4gQWxzbyBpdCBmb2xsb3dl
ZCBhIGRpZmZlcmVudCBwYXRoIHRvIGdldA0KPiA+PiByZWNyZWF0ZWQoc2hhcmVkIGluIGNvbW1p
dCBtZXNzYWdlKS4NCj4gPj4gPiBEb2VzIHRoYXQgbWVhbiB5b3Ugc2hvdWxkIGp1c3QgY29tYmlu
ZSB0aGUgdHdvPw0KPiA+PiBMZXQgdXMga25vdyBpZiB0aGF0IGlzIGZpbmUgdG8gbWVyZ2UgdGhl
bS4gV2UgY2FuIG1vZGlmeSB0aGUgY29tbWl0DQo+ID4+IG1lc3NhZ2UgYWNjb3JkaW5nbHkuDQo+
ID4+ID4gT3IgcmV2ZXJzZSB0aGUgb3JkZXIsIGlmIHBhdGNoIDIgZG9lc24ndCBjYXVzZSBwcm9i
bGVtcyBvbiBpdHMgb3duPw0KPiA+PiBQYXRjaCAyIGhhcyBhIGRlcGVuZGVuY3kgb24gcGF0Y2gg
MS4NCj4gPiBPbmUgY29ycmVjdGlvbi4gVGhlcmUgaXMgbm8gY29tbWl0IGRlcGVuZGVuY3kgYmV0
d2VlbiBwYXRjaCAxIGFuZA0KPiAyKHRoZXkgY2FuIGJlIGFwcGxpZWQgaW4gYW55IG9yZGVyKS4g
QnV0IHRoZSByZXN1bHQgd291bGQgYmUgc2FtZS4gV2UgbmVlZA0KPiBib3RoIGZpeGVzLiBMZXQg
dXMga25vdyBpZiB3ZSBjYW4gY29tYmluZSB0aGVtLg0KPg0KPiBJIGhhdmVuJ3QgY2xvc2VseSBs
b29rZWQgYXQgcGF0Y2ggMiB5ZXQuIE15IG9ubHkgc3RhdGVtZW50IHdhcyB0aGF0IGl0IG1ha2Vz
DQo+IG5vIHNlbnNlIHRvIGhhdmUgMiBjb21taXRzLCB3aXRoIHRoZSBzZWNvbmQgb25lIGxhYmVs
ZWQgYXMgIkZpeGluZyIgdGhlIGZpcnN0DQo+IG9uZS4gRnJvbSB5b3VyIGRlc2NyaXB0aW9ucywg
aXQgc291bmRzIGxpa2UgcGF0Y2ggMiBzaG91bGQgYWN0dWFsbHkgY29tZSBmaXJzdCwNCk9rLiBJ
IHVuZGVyc3RhbmQuIEkgd2lsbCByZW9yZGVyIHRoZW0gYW5kIHNlbmQgdjMoYWxvbmcgd2l0aCBz
cGlubG9jayBjaGFuZ2UpLg0KPiBidXQgSSdtIG5vdCByZWFsbHkgc3VyZS4gSSBvbmx5IGxvb2tl
ZCBmYXIgZW5vdWdoIHRvIHNheSB0aGF0IEkgZGlkbid0IGxpa2UgcGF0Y2gNCj4gMSBhcy1pcyA6
KQ0KPg0KPiBCcmlhbg0KUmVnYXJkcywNCkdhbmFwYXRoaQ0K