From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17BE1C00A89 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 11:13:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BBAD20782 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 11:13:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Ijc4T9KE" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7BBAD20782 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id DFC7C6B00E5; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 06:13:50 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id DAD6E6B00E6; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 06:13:50 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id CB51C6B00E7; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 06:13:50 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 621676B00E5 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 06:13:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin08.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 040C6180AD802 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 11:13:50 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77450104620.08.hat87_0506438272c9 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0F6A1819E766 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 11:13:49 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: hat87_0506438272c9 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 7224 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by imf18.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 11:13:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1604574828; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=3+3/RgwfG63WJlv5vDyjVl195q0a5RYiBw0pVbeNEWk=; b=Ijc4T9KE3f/S5t9Ua2K/002Cw2MOIIolPU0i5JST+1JzHeYIZjKa/rJEzXQmJyyJTt0UGa wYRn3y71GI5FPHQJpORkK/LuRi2o8O+uNqB2fvL1YaquEmLPng09wRaY6RJaqrVjngbj9W fhU3N3XXNI/n6WX6IMJ/GL4PKlbYPbg= Received: from mail-ed1-f71.google.com (mail-ed1-f71.google.com [209.85.208.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-289-E763wVb-N_iWT4pjcHCVvA-1; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 06:13:47 -0500 X-MC-Unique: E763wVb-N_iWT4pjcHCVvA-1 Received: by mail-ed1-f71.google.com with SMTP id y99so406284ede.3 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 03:13:47 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=R4k4SKFvZRyxZUUectJ8LVntk4jaYo6zD7QcqD9bzQo=; b=iA4RLzEvAeMdkv20F44NJVYoYew3pSvhLMNcUfzVJaxpNGFvWxVFEi0Ek0N6DcLlSJ PRJRHHD845ut76DBcdR9KihW7sY72UM5Lp4r1NhWep6sfiNoSBQ4Nd4ix4eNVM3t0Fn/ BxvAdbHi2lTj7wBnLOWewDpcagaVGnRP27Ea2mcjhCUzMHYRJzcdDnQwFG1zMQ4btrvq /4UWiTgryKon8GapeYpTf+W4YtoNGMFrOj8ZbvYzqioXZHtsdw9U5uIgUHiXtUi4IpuU ytQPOS+S9FhVeAXU6sn6UccsstHfW9p4i5ZLTFzxI+e17vstiFIq6YkhUWWbNqdnYqZC QGQw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532g+QoWuS5vxBkEC28/gsvAjByBfSN2lB36BdU9FqLuRYAkeEge j/5mwImZJQaJlx4NjJhfdTJHb5BbXk9Sll+X9lb2KPos8Pd+MCoscG9JOgVI4nP5b+pu/18BSds vRGhYezS4kLM= X-Received: by 2002:a50:c945:: with SMTP id p5mr1928197edh.55.1604574825535; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 03:13:45 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxMWEEePBbN5mYNTiJIeSojG5bngWsmvejr1D1k6BEnMf3C+wxb81JDQRgnZ9/PS9P4/dmEmw== X-Received: by 2002:a50:c945:: with SMTP id p5mr1928180edh.55.1604574825274; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 03:13:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.167.228.65] (tmo-098-193.customers.d1-online.com. [80.187.98.193]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z13sm744106ejp.30.2020.11.05.03.13.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Nov 2020 03:13:44 -0800 (PST) From: David Hildenbrand Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: Regression: QCA6390 fails with "mm/page_alloc: place pages to tail in __free_pages_core()" Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:13:43 +0100 Message-Id: <8ACA82DB-D2FE-4599-8A01-D42218FDE1E5@redhat.com> References: Cc: Kalle Valo , Pavel Procopiuc , david@redhat.com, ath11k@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: To: Vlastimil Babka X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18A8395) Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: > Am 05.11.2020 um 11:42 schrieb Vlastimil Babka : >=20 > =EF=BB=BFOn 11/5/20 10:04 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> (changing the subject, adding more lists and people) >> Pavel Procopiuc writes: >>> Op 04.11.2020 om 10:12 schreef Kalle Valo: >>>> Yeah, it is unfortunately time consuming but it is the best way to get >>>> bottom of this. >>>=20 >>> I have found the commit that breaks things for me, it's >>> 7fef431be9c9ac255838a9578331567b9dba4477 mm/page_alloc: place pages to >>> tail in __free_pages_core() >>>=20 >>> I've reverted it on top of the 5.10-rc2 and ath11k driver loads fine >>> and I have wifi working. >> Oh, very interesting. Thanks a lot for the bisection, otherwise we would >> have never found out whats causing this. >> David & mm folks: Pavel noticed that his QCA6390 Wi-Fi 6 device (driver >> ath11k) failed on v5.10-rc1. After bisecting he found that the commit >> below causes the regression. I have not been able to reproduce this and >> for me QCA6390 works fine. I don't know if this needs a specific kernel >> configuration or what's the difference between our setups. >> Any ideas what might cause this and how to fix it? >> Full discussion: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/ath11k/2020-Novemb= er/000501.html >> commit 7fef431be9c9ac255838a9578331567b9dba4477 >> Author: David Hildenbrand >> AuthorDate: Thu Oct 15 20:09:35 2020 -0700 >> Commit: Linus Torvalds >> CommitDate: Fri Oct 16 11:11:18 2020 -0700 >> mm/page_alloc: place pages to tail in __free_pages_core() >=20 > Let me paste from the ath11k discussion: >=20 >> * Relevant errors from the log: >> # journalctl -b | grep -iP '05:00|ath11k' >> Nov 02 10:41:26 razor kernel: pci 0000:05:00.0: [17cb:1101] type 00 clas= s 0x028000 >> Nov 02 10:41:26 razor kernel: pci 0000:05:00.0: reg 0x10: [mem 0xd210000= 0-0xd21fffff 64bit] >> Nov 02 10:41:26 razor kernel: pci 0000:05:00.0: PME# supported from D0 D= 3hot D3cold >> Nov 02 10:41:26 razor kernel: pci 0000:05:00.0: 4.000 Gb/s available PCI= e bandwidth, limited by 5.0 GT/s PCIe x1 link at 0000:00:1c.1 (capable of 7= .876 Gb/s with 8.0 GT/s PCIe x1 link) >> Nov 02 10:41:26 razor kernel: pci 0000:05:00.0: Adding to iommu group 21 >> Nov 02 10:41:27 razor kernel: ath11k_pci 0000:05:00.0: WARNING: ath11k P= CI support is experimental! >> Nov 02 10:41:27 razor kernel: ath11k_pci 0000:05:00.0: BAR 0: assigned [= mem 0xd2100000-0xd21fffff 64bit] >> Nov 02 10:41:27 razor kernel: ath11k_pci 0000:05:00.0: enabling device (= 0000 -> 0002) >> Nov 02 10:41:27 razor kernel: mhi 0000:05:00.0: Requested to power ON >> Nov 02 10:41:27 razor kernel: mhi 0000:05:00.0: Power on setup success >> Nov 02 10:41:27 razor kernel: ath11k_pci 0000:05:00.0: Respond mem req f= ailed, result: 1, err: 0 >=20 > This seems to be ath11k_qmi_respond_fw_mem_request(). Why is it failure w= ith error 0? No idea. >=20 > What would happen if all the GFP_KERNEL in the file were changed to GFP_D= MA32? >=20 > I'm thinking the hardware perhaps doesn't like too high physical addresse= s or something. But if I think correctly, freeing to tail should actually m= ove them towards head. So it's weird. It depends in which order memory is exposed to MM, which might depend on ot= her factors in some configurations. This smells like it exposes an existing bug. Can you reproduce also with zo= ne shuffling enabled?