From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (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 40C9910A3D; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:50:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718117453; cv=none; b=iT48zOac2fgYM4NKAI6MIDmmbe4eB4Gn05yNyj+SAp7Ka5GivlLT2uzlOy2Ora6Yndv/C5W4OZ+qNgPVsGELv1Bh/vtc3yCXkU7AmGub2Z9jKAluSaKAeopPUQB3Zo9Uc3Y7zVEuY6YHlF34J2RnVeM2KMq9zlfUdqDxD5z67xA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718117453; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Q+Vk2+eVANh0njy/hhC4ju9xNbv0AM9K21HHITFs+uo=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=cDjjvrrgVSLfvQhjHO8hGIMuxbNtlDUMl2l+dt3y7Llummjx0c3noGWHGCxM7RYV2U1LmkaPDLTpOJUXLw+PFebiKY16vQ145nZOscUZrvy5WECq5hBCPV+8qLYo5c/n2+5Y+iRN/0Dsynmoax+9tNUKJhg5YA/EqqB5wF6z7/k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=WX9WlhBG; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="WX9WlhBG" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=zWg8FBvRhKhB/8z85vkan77ET92XRIyEVF5H0gZA0zA=; t=1718117452; x=1719327052; b=WX9WlhBGmAwiHZB7UcSCng9lAFzOXlrOc/r9ibDjNvzS6j7 JYjI3CCUPWwB53E5te7YAXA5a9N1YpzzYoC5R0HJFRKOaoHf/BOw+sdfAdLQCo8/qGsHkCfiTPQFV 9y8BAdcCBDUX95NU5HimBbFbmPkPC/VUizGaeqQVXTGmHh9yyncsEIzbAMQG2f6dJuVlYjCwt9/EF 0d2ub0E7q4UyDZzNk04C/GdXuad+qohgNl2JnYr025XABNvQAg5cxPA4rk9sK40mwZm9kJxR0SOtk wUatPa4HPFEGQEqvsXPzgFievygqwhjDGCX4vJPn5/FxDGM7ds0/+da7WNCxtX7A==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1sH2pl-00000008l4a-1eEV; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:50:49 +0200 Message-ID: <7a8e220d77d7e30a0cfaf984404ef2f57eaa785f.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: iwlwifi: Regression after migrating to 6.6.32 From: Johannes Berg To: Fabio Estevam Cc: miriam.rachel.korenblit@intel.com, kvalo@kernel.org, Jakub Kicinski , linux-wireless , linux-kernel Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:50:48 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <3fbb5317d9ff33ef1b60ca8297537335ce86a79d.camel@sipsolutions.net> <95163ee547da95964c16f87a38d3326ae4da3253.camel@sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.52.2 (3.52.2-1.fc40) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Tue, 2024-06-11 at 11:32 -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Hi Johannes, >=20 > I forgot to mention, but the Wifi device I am using is: >=20 > Intel(R) Wi-Fi 6 AX200 160MHz, REV=3D0x340 >=20 > On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 10:54=E2=80=AFAM Johannes Berg > wrote: >=20 > > > [ 5.038174] rxb->offset is 0 trans_pcie->rx_buf_bytes is 4096 > >=20 > > so that looks pretty normal? > >=20 > > Might be useful to see rx->page_dma too, supported_dma_mask should be > > 4095 or 2047 depending on the device, but I'm not sure how you could en= d > > up with a DMA mapping for a page that's not at least 11 bit aligned? >=20 > Here it goes: >=20 > [ 4.344218] rxb->offset is 0 trans_pcie->rx_buf_bytes is 4096 > rxb->page_dma is 4215433216 trans_pcie->supported_dma_mask is 4095 > I don't know what a typical rxb->page_dma should be. >=20 It should be an address (so that's fine), but I don't see how it ends up not being page-aligned if we request to map a page and 4096 bytes?? Is that platform "weird" with strange page size, or something? johannes