[GIT] Networking

On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 11:45 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 7:23 AM, Coelho, Luciano

> <luciano.coelho@intel.com> wrote:

> > 

> > 

> > I can confirm that 4.6 contains the same bug.  And reverting the

> > patch

> > I mentioned does solve the problem...

> > 

> > The same patch works fine in our internal tree.  I'll have to

> > figure

> > out together with Emmanuel what the problem actually is.

> Hmm.

> 

> From what I can tell, there's a merge bug in commit 909b27f70643,

> where David seems to have lost some of the changes to

> iwl_mvm_set_tx_cmd().

> 

> The reason seems to be a conflict with d8fe484470dd, where David

> missed the fact that "info->driver_data[0]" had become

> "skb_info->driver_data[0]", and then he removed the skb_info because

> it was unused.

> 

> I do not know if that's the reason for the problem I see. But I will

> test.

> 

> David, do you happen to recall that merge conflict? I think you must

> have removed that "skb_info" variable declaration and initialization

> manually (due to the "unused variable" warning, which in turn was due

> to the incorrect merge of the actual conflict), because I think git

> would have merged that line into the result.


Actually I just tested it and indeed it seems to be the merge damage
(which we discussed extensively in the linux-wireless mailing list)
that causes this problem.  The "4.6 doesn't work either" thing was a
false alarm.

If the merge damage is fixed this way, the problem is gone:

        u32 tx_flags = le32_to_cpu(tx_cmd->tx_flags);
@@ -294,7 +295,7 @@ void iwl_mvm_set_tx_cmd(struct iwl_mvm *mvm, struct
sk_buff *skb,
        tx_cmd->tx_flags = cpu_to_le32(tx_flags);
        /* Total # bytes to be transmitted */
        tx_cmd->len = cpu_to_le16((u16)skb->len +
-               (uintptr_t)info->driver_data[0]);
+               (uintptr_t)skb_info->driver_data[0]);
        tx_cmd->life_time = cpu_to_le32(TX_CMD_LIFE_TIME_INFINITE);
        tx_cmd->sta_id = sta_id;


Kalle, David, what is the status with the fix that is on the way via
your trees?

--
Cheers,
Luca.

"Coelho, Luciano" <luciano.coelho@intel.com> writes:

> Kalle, David, what is the status with the fix that is on the way via
> your trees?

It would be best if you could send a patch either directly to Dave or
Linus to resolve this quickly.

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
> It would be best if you could send a patch either directly to Dave or
> Linus to resolve this quickly.

I'm committing my patch myself right now, since this bug makes my
laptop useless, and I will take credit for finding and testing it on
my own even if it was apparently also discussed independently on the
networking list ;)

                Linus

On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 12:00 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>

> wrote:

> > 

> > 

> > It would be best if you could send a patch either directly to Dave

> > or

> > Linus to resolve this quickly.

> I'm committing my patch myself right now, since this bug makes my

> laptop useless, and I will take credit for finding and testing it on

> my own even if it was apparently also discussed independently on the

> networking list ;)


Great! :)

You beat me by a few minutes, even though I had the whole day to play
with it. :\

--
Cheers,
Luca.

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:

> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>
>> It would be best if you could send a patch either directly to Dave or
>> Linus to resolve this quickly.
>
> I'm committing my patch myself right now, since this bug makes my
> laptop useless, and I will take credit for finding and testing it on
> my own

Kiitti :)

> even if it was apparently also discussed independently on the
> networking list ;)

Yeah, sorry about taking this too long.