From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from rtits2.realtek.com.tw (rtits2.realtek.com [211.75.126.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A84A625B09E; Tue, 15 Sep 2026 00:40:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=211.75.126.72 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789432823; cv=none; b=q9Tw/qp4++UyQeMwrvsTCMSfLPq/skXdpEilexB47wqxpPww9pev5t1d7LSLhQ67T8/RxIk/FEa/EXnoHcHYaQK2DCSs1/iy8kYrJ9fVmQHjVdO/O7TzM5q1FJMk8vh19W+7Sa6gG/ypPllq4MM3CCkezwxITMOs5YeA9XGuZPs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789432823; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ha7+AGq4swCCGi8az5HgRtPQvJkkNcZt9tTYI2z9AOc=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=SMAw0LSsT2XAJkbEORE5hpl+W9i1IfIUoDCnjS9A0LoAWfjvj+5wE/c/1KKfej72YAI57HNrm9+FLbz0c3HzIAd0KTHHvOq3tMo/ZlKR+AvGqFfq/yTCvyxTiX0ND5wk2WRloq6SWAhy7fD4/3bpcXF6AT/EHmLDYlkQNp0ZPg8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=realtek.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=realtek.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=realtek.com header.i=@realtek.com header.b=HRsGnHvK; arc=none smtp.client-ip=211.75.126.72 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=realtek.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=realtek.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=realtek.com header.i=@realtek.com header.b="HRsGnHvK" X-SpamFilter-By: ArmorX SpamTrap 5.80 with qID 68F0eBYr91150311, This message is accepted by code: ctloc85258 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=realtek.com; s=dkim; t=1789432811; bh=YDKgvmbQpYuceRlkPyqN48eYGAdVzrAI86Rqre6/b2g=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; b=HRsGnHvKQeijs1Y+BU6VTPr4pT0ZQADRoE+nTRQl0Evp5YYnoPUklRm52WbZcW9KY QGD9GWfjr7GUKmmY12R2D/byeMrtgDC/TpP7aQP3cqj6GTUrmkzzvqgB0XrEoW78fH DZM5gHFQ4uzeWP7Y6NQdzz4z+I36fYYXUHIWe/GuoUNTuWlz3+77m+K+nbluOdhfgi 4FbC9wx2zT70TGL9vToj459x192emXk/1UUjRFFUt6YCEeImTR9533f9Raw6OebHgm seOd9OWU6/itZRBxHETw8YCExZ2YA+Qh57Q7AIRbqTmdXt9gNedhflKQ/r03f1OvjI 4TB4rHzvj7Meg== Received: from mail.realtek.com (rtkexhmbs03.realtek.com.tw[10.21.1.53]) by rtits2.realtek.com.tw (8.15.2/3.29/5.94) with ESMTPS id 68F0eBYr91150311 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 15 Sep 2026 08:40:11 +0800 Received: from RTKEXHMBS06.realtek.com.tw (10.21.1.56) by RTKEXHMBS03.realtek.com.tw (10.21.1.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.2562.49; Tue, 15 Sep 2026 08:40:11 +0800 Received: from RTKEXHMBS06.realtek.com.tw ([::1]) by RTKEXHMBS06.realtek.com.tw ([fe80::b3cc:c263:b82d:e87c%10]) with mapi id 15.02.2562.049; Tue, 15 Sep 2026 08:40:11 +0800 From: Ping-Ke Shih To: Maxim Skokov CC: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: RE: rtw89: WOW_CPUIO_RX_CTRL is never answered on RTL8851B Thread-Topic: rtw89: WOW_CPUIO_RX_CTRL is never answered on RTL8851B Thread-Index: AQHdQu5+p1mtl9gOz0eDp/HSGCWOaLbNt3lA Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 00:40:11 +0000 Message-ID: <95af665973144da2b527b9d6d445a6ca@realtek.com> References: <20260912193939.5565-1-skokovmaksimevg@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20260912193939.5565-1-skokovmaksimevg@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-TW Content-Language: zh-TW Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Maxim Skokov wrote: >=20 > but rtw89_fw_feat_list only carries >=20 > __CFG_FW_FEAT(RTL8852A, lt, 0, 13, 37, 0, NO_WOW_CPU_IO_RX), > __CFG_FW_FEAT(RTL8852B, lt, 0, 29, 30, 0, NO_WOW_CPU_IO_RX), >=20 > and nothing for RTL8851B. I'll send a patch to add this: __CFG_FW_FEAT(RTL8851B, lt, 0, 29, 57, 0, NO_WOW_CPU_IO_RX), >=20 > One unrelated note from the same trace: "Unknown wakeup reason 0" is not > a failed AoAC read. AOAC_RPT_1 and AOAC_RPT_2 both succeed, and > rtw89_wow_show_wakeup_reason() reads the reason straight from > wow_reason_reg, which holds 0 because the card was not the wake source > here, the RTC alarm was. The switch has no case for that and falls > through to the warning. I'll check this internally if it is possible to avoid the "reason 0"=20 message.=20