Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:f3d0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id a16csp835102pxv; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 10:05:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxckSGsBVnnbrnaaeg0nlSx54MlaS2zSYQCGu60tnuNtzNuzgLCgh0wOhdUC+60W8nVK0j2 X-Received: by 2002:a6b:f60e:: with SMTP id n14mr29547609ioh.179.1625850328593; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 10:05:28 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1625850328; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=FFGKVFIcYu1fT3nQTvULE9HFHVReEtcVgW6lt+DeF8wwgmn+8ycd9JOOdrava70zvu FuiWl0r5gOgfzQt5HZ42pOgKvCwWgPNqV8vL77D6MNeF2vjjkbZ9Ck/CkKHQ1me97jSX D3D0TXIc4rC7x+BHrz7VdN8kREFhm/0hWHnvgu3py6SuCM7IFdPGZMrPhkjZo23xgT/Q yysYsXT5BGdRf+XmVumIIxi9S/D+6zX9gx/l8ektVYTjRR7jYzAWSC0vBrK/98BOPjlD etn8bhN817ICQp22NpHEs/zX/6ecMWCDms6yynzghOHQ1t73OXdek5zc3UuZBZhxu8ds NXoA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references :cc:to:subject:dkim-signature; bh=dVvi+fZClluzxbZN95gNbThYay+2YwEvt12ff5eLbXk=; b=HUWMxBfQSR2akH0msdAHeNMTegYtk1ZT/rLs1PVdO2U6zISu45q1+R0SgK2aLlzImG bVzHnfpV+xGSjgfKhNdXuxj/ajrt1JCC5JOrUUpGTdC7GkHyY2XcjCRxj8ujPUUVz1o+ 7q2ffJUa2/+QeIaOa2omUlPZ7ZmI132DbLwW6scjxUOXt7001pV6b9DOnqOnkSxE91Di KdTK7wOMd9xqcX29th1OSiEfTp3Uh2wTywsCkE8Vz/OUGejIpJp+2RY6p6CourED3unj IvjGiR3TIsuNyipenyKolAx44Q6i+Y/4Ge7XUPLRmfvMkC4F+FCJBFHCZF0c5WZoVAGO JOdg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=tEu1JMlV; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id i12si7519810ilu.104.2021.07.09.10.05.09; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 10:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=tEu1JMlV; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230111AbhGIRG3 (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 9 Jul 2021 13:06:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38920 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230048AbhGIRG1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2021 13:06:27 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62f.google.com (mail-ej1-x62f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D6FAC0613DD; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 10:03:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id hr1so17441014ejc.1; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 10:03:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dVvi+fZClluzxbZN95gNbThYay+2YwEvt12ff5eLbXk=; b=tEu1JMlVzD8b1ypcdJPbklHbisxRVqJruL4zMITA4wwQWTQlw9JW2PCaAikP5hc6LH nBO4sDB+3rIcpzI6li/thAFzEd1rtBgfFWRTm5mNUS7La79azOLXUrSbVXXP5NhVsOGV LM/jRRmNQr7t8SFQn4Kjtn9nCHfLBaJbrxb/NfwURY5ptX1HVYBVxI9kYoMCoA1CJG+B rN9bNSD0vWjGu8RjQyD/xmOETiz01jK0RSlEO5HgcqE9UcFlFhoke6elSE9u7jvk/nYv H7COXhXsDnRgdniVwk8qxRZJUtmfGmCSIwRUksFkpOWEYSNgUAV9GHWb0erbuLdZ64il qSzw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=dVvi+fZClluzxbZN95gNbThYay+2YwEvt12ff5eLbXk=; b=HZLdsUUo3wInXSmrDF1vkopxUyIdt4CLAW4Zn6OPm6YPAovBhHplrsz9Bz5tVMYSjh N8fka6U4JVwvJyVLI5NzkkNMEZhGXv5S0QUYf6PaRqas5erkgs/s8wXO4uCE/p7jKhPu GA6bcYreAiMy5epMzF/AieyK0C7hDekhfe4zRECymX3O258kbMKOeyarwOYFpPOf3eTH gw3NHhWs01mI+mXnGKkLPGGvc1wqGGtfbIivYEr+wn++nGMF4sQZVFfcjaL+G1apjbFG ICzixd7ADqFyKZxrinZdBjcp4TzpfBxzMXa0vuZZXambu0ELSkTv9pdKq56tzWJHRbsK 0ukw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5327Mo/LDyawBT3ocVkLXqOeGXLASQ/UxagocRrkkIXBUGmNNUH0 7w9TNKfTSS9HEgCqRXJDa4Q= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:1c98:: with SMTP id nb24mr39644300ejc.316.1625850221623; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 10:03:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.17.0.13] ([37.58.58.229]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id zp1sm2581308ejb.92.2021.07.09.10.03.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 09 Jul 2021 10:03:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mwifiex: pcie: add reset_d3cold quirk for Surface gen4+ devices To: =?UTF-8?Q?Pali_Roh=c3=a1r?= , =?UTF-8?Q?Jonas_Dre=c3=9fler?= Cc: Amitkumar Karwar , Ganapathi Bhat , Xinming Hu , Kalle Valo , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Tsuchiya Yuto , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Andy Shevchenko , Bjorn Helgaas References: <20210709145831.6123-1-verdre@v0yd.nl> <20210709145831.6123-3-verdre@v0yd.nl> <20210709151800.7b2qqezlcicbgrqn@pali> <20210709161251.g4cvq3l4fnh4ve4r@pali> From: Maximilian Luz Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2021 19:03:37 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210709161251.g4cvq3l4fnh4ve4r@pali> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org On 7/9/21 6:12 PM, Pali Rohár wrote: [...] >>> Hello! Now I'm thinking loudly about this patch. Why this kind of reset >>> is needed only for Surface devices? AFAIK these 88W8897 chips are same >>> in all cards. Chip itself implements PCIe interface (and also SDIO) so >>> for me looks very strange if this 88W8897 PCIe device needs DMI specific >>> quirks. I cannot believe that Microsoft got some special version of >>> these chips from Marvell which are different than version uses on cards >>> in mPCIe form factor. >>> >>> And now when I'm reading comment below about PCIe bridge to which is >>> this 88W8897 PCIe chip connected, is not this rather an issue in that >>> PCIe bridge (instead of mwifiex/88W8897) or in ACPI firmware which >>> controls this bridge? >>> >>> Or are having other people same issues on mPCIe form factor wifi cards >>> with 88W8897 chips and then this quirk should not DMI dependent? >>> >>> Note that I'm seeing issues with reset and other things also on chip >>> 88W8997 when is connected to system via SDIO. These chips have both PCIe >>> and SDIO buses, it just depends which pins are used. >>> >> >> Hi and thanks for the quick reply! Honestly I've no idea, this is just the >> first method we found that allows for a proper reset of the chip. What I >> know is that some Surface devices need that ACPI DSM call (the one that was >> done in the commit I dropped in this version of the patchset) to reset the >> chip instead of this method. >> >> Afaik other devices with this chip don't need this resetting method, at >> least Marvell employees couldn't reproduce the issues on their testing >> devices. >> >> So would you suggest we just try to match for the pci chip 88W8897 instead? > > Hello! Such suggestion makes sense when we know that it is 88W8897 > issue. But if you got information that issue cannot be reproduced on > other 88W8897 cards then matching 88W8897 is not correct. > > From all this information looks like that it is problem in (Microsoft?) > PCIe bridge to which is card connected. Otherwise I do not reason how it > can be 88W8897 affected. Either it is reproducible on 88W8897 cards also > in other devices or issue is not on 88W8897 card. I doubt that it's an issue with the PCIe bridge (itself at least). The same type of bridge is used for both dGPU and NVME SSD on my device (see lspci output below) and those work fine. Also if I'm seeing that right it's from the Intel CPU, so my guess is that a lot more people would have issues with that then. I don't know about the hardware side, so it might be possible that it's an issue with integrating both bridge and wifi chip, in which case it's still probably best handled via DMI quirks unless we know more. Also as Tsuchiya mentioned in his original submission, on Windows the device is reset via this D3cold method. I've only skimmed that errata.inf file mentioned, but I think this is what he's referring to: Controls whether ACPIDeviceEnableD3ColdOnSurpriseRemoval rule will be evaluated or not on a given platform. Currently ACPIDeviceEnableD3ColdOnSurpriseRemoval rule only needs to be evaluated on Surface platforms which contain the Marvell WiFi controller which depends on device going through D3Cold as part of surprise-removal. and Starting with Windows releases *after* Blue, ACPI will not put surprise-removed devices into D3Cold automatically. Some known scenarios (viz. WiFi reset/recovery) rely on the device cycling through D3Cold on surprise-removal. This hack allows surprise-removed devices to be put into D3Cold (if supported by the stack). So, as far as I can tell, the chip doesn't like to be surprise-removed (which seems to happen during reset) and then needs to be power-cycled, which I think is likely due to some issue with firmware state. So the quirk on Windows seems very Surface specific. There also seem a bunch of revisions of these chips around, for example my SB2 is affected by a bug that we've tied to the specific hardware revision which causes some issues with host-sleep (IIRC chip switches rapidly between wake and sleep states without any external influence, which is not how it should behave and how it does behave on a later hardware revision). >> Then we'd probably have to check if there are any laptops where multiple >> devices are connected to the pci bridge as Amey suggested in a review >> before. > > Well, I do not know... But if this is issue with PCIe bridge then > similar issue could be observed also for other PCIe devices with this > PCIe bridge. But question is if there are other laptops with this PCIe > bridge. And also it can be a problem in ACPI firmware on those Surface > devices, which implements some PCIe bridge functionality. So it is > possible that issue is with PCIe bridge, not in HW, but in SW/firmware > part which can be Microsoft specific... So too many questions to which > we do not know answers. > > Could you provide output of 'lspci -nn -vv' and 'lspci -tvnn' on > affected machines? If you have already sent it in some previous email, > just send a link. At least I'm not able to find it right now and output > may contain something useful... From my Surface Book 2 (with the same issue): - lspci -tvnn: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/mm3YpcZJ8N/ - lspci -vv -nn: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/dctTDP738N/ Regards, Max