Bug 1069403 - iwlwifi 7260 Wireless N: ASSERT 14F4
Summary: iwlwifi 7260 Wireless N: ASSERT 14F4
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: kernel
Version: 20
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Kernel Maintainer List
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-02-24 23:13 UTC by Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Modified: 2014-02-28 18:35 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

Fixed In Version: kernel-3.13.5-200.fc20
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-02-28 18:35:13 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
lspci output (2.79 KB, text/x-c)
2014-02-24 23:13 UTC, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
no flags Details
kernel log, starting at reboot (248.94 KB, text/x-c)
2014-02-24 23:15 UTC, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
no flags Details

Description Peter F. Patel-Schneider 2014-02-24 23:13:36 UTC
Created attachment 867177 [details]
lspci output

Description of problem:

I am seeing repeated microcode SW errors detected on my Lenovo 2 Pro with a 
Intel Corporation Wireless 7260 (rev 6b).  The errors repeat quite regularly.  The wireless still works, at least mostly, but it may be that some features are not available.  

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

Kernel 3.13.3-201.fc20.x86_64
iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: loaded firmware version 22.15.8.0 op_mode iwlmvm

How reproducible:

Always (on this hardware)

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Boot the machine
2. Use the wireless

Actual results:

Repeated "iwlwifi 0000:01:00.0: Microcode SW error detected.  Restarting 0x2000000." and associated output.  The error generally is repeated every two minutes - to the second.

Expected results:

No errors.

Additional info:

I have attached lspci output for the device and system logs showing the repeated errors.

This is very similar to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1046935 but the traceback is somewhat different.

I seem to remember being able to use the 5G band with this hardware in the past, but I'm not seeting the 5B band for my router now.

Comment 1 Peter F. Patel-Schneider 2014-02-24 23:15:24 UTC
Created attachment 867178 [details]
kernel log, starting at reboot

Comment 3 Peter F. Patel-Schneider 2014-02-25 12:10:38 UTC
Excellent.  Should I try out this patch, or just wait for it to be applied to Fedora 20?   If I should try out the patch, what do I need to do?

Comment 4 Emmanuel Grumbach 2014-02-25 12:24:13 UTC
(In reply to Peter F. Patel-Schneider from comment #3)
> Excellent.  Should I try out this patch, or just wait for it to be applied
> to Fedora 20?   If I should try out the patch, what do I need to do?

Your call. I am not RedHat / Fedora :)
From my POV - this issue is closed - you can compile / install the kernel by yourself - your call (this typically make packaging system unhappy).

Comment 5 Josh Boyer 2014-02-25 14:36:39 UTC
The commit Emmanuel points to corresponds to stable commit 33c99f4a3fac973ca89431e713eee3a8d6c8b449 which is in 3.13.5.  We have 3.13.5 built in koji and it should be hitting updates-testing soon-ish.

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2014-02-25 15:17:30 UTC
kernel-3.13.5-200.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-3.13.5-200.fc20

Comment 7 D. Hugh Redelmeier 2014-02-25 22:13:14 UTC
I've tested https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-3.13.5-200.fc20 on my Lenovo Yoga 2 pro.  Only one boot so far, but it seems to have fixed this problem.  And there were some other oddities that have gone away at the same time.

Thanks Emmanuel and Josh!

Comment 8 Peter F. Patel-Schneider 2014-02-26 02:49:27 UTC
I grabbed 3.13.5 out of koji, and the problem appears to be fixed.

Comment 9 Ivan Afonichev 2014-02-26 10:48:45 UTC
On my Lenova Yoga 2 Pro it doesn't fix the issue:

[root@localhost ~]# iw wlp1s0 scan|grep freq
	freq: 2437
	freq: 2412
	freq: 2412
	freq: 2412
	freq: 2412
	freq: 2437
[root@localhost ~]# uname -a
Linux localhost 3.13.5-200.fc20.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Feb 24 16:51:35 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux


On kernel-3.12.10-300.fc20.x86_64 5GGz band works well.

Comment 10 Emmanuel Grumbach 2014-02-26 11:16:49 UTC
Your SKU seem not to support A band.
We had a bug that let NICs that do not support A band work on A band and this led to FW asserts to lots of people. I fixed that by rightfully disable A band for these NICs.
So this does fix the issue.

Comment 11 Ivan Afonichev 2014-02-26 12:05:51 UTC
Maybe there should be option to disable/enable it?
I am so happy on 3.12.10-300.fc20.x86_64 with working 5GGz.

It is so great that linux has working 5GGz on the same hardware were Windows hasn't. It is good reason for newbies to install linux on their yogas.

Please implement an on option to enable/disable A band. I don't want to stay on outdated kernel forever.

Comment 12 Peter F. Patel-Schneider 2014-02-26 13:02:18 UTC
So, Ivan, you are saying that the device works in the 5G band under 3.12.10, but produces lots of errors.   That was my experience as well.

Is the device supposed to work in the 5G band according to the manufacturer?  Maybe this is a new example of selling the same hardware in two different guises, with the cheaper one having some features turned off.

Sure, I would like to get 5G working on the device.  I wonder what changes were made between 3.12.10 and 3.13.5, and whether it would be possible to get a configuration that both works on 5G and doesn't produce the errors.  I think that 5G didn't work on 3.13.3, but I'm not sure, as I upgraded to 3.13 for a different reason.

Anyway, in 3.13.5 there is no longer the continual errors being reported, so this particular bug is fixed.


PS:  There has been lots of chatter in the Lenovo forums about this device, and why Lenovo put such a low-end WiFi card on a high-end laptop.  Some people have spent the $30 or so to put in the AC dual-band card instead.

Comment 13 Emmanuel Grumbach 2014-02-26 13:07:07 UTC
(In reply to Peter F. Patel-Schneider from comment #12)
> So, Ivan, you are saying that the device works in the 5G band under 3.12.10,
> but produces lots of errors.   That was my experience as well.
> 
> Is the device supposed to work in the 5G band according to the manufacturer?
> Maybe this is a new example of selling the same hardware in two different
> guises, with the cheaper one having some features turned off.

If the NIC doesn't publish support A band in 3.13.5, then it is not meant to support it.

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2014-02-26 13:54:12 UTC
Package kernel-3.13.5-200.fc20:
* should fix your issue,
* was pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository,
* should be available at your local mirror within two days.
Update it with:
# su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing kernel-3.13.5-200.fc20'
as soon as you are able to, then reboot.
Please go to the following url:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-3094/kernel-3.13.5-200.fc20
then log in and leave karma (feedback).

Comment 15 Ivan Afonichev 2014-02-26 16:30:04 UTC
[root@localhost ~]# iw phy0 info|grep Band
	Band 1:
[root@localhost ~]# uname -a
Linux localhost 3.13.5-200.fc20.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Feb 24 16:51:35 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

[root@localhost ~]# iw phy0 info|grep Band
	Band 1:
	Band 2:
[root@localhost ~]# uname -a
Linux localhost 3.13.3-201.fc20.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Feb 14 19:08:32 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

[root@localhost ~]# iw phy0 info|grep Band
	Band 1:
	Band 2:
[root@localhost ~]# uname -a
Linux localhost 3.12.10-300.fc20.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Feb 6 22:11:48 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
[root@localhost ~]# iwconfig 
wlp1s0    IEEE 802.11abgn  ESSID:"GD-wifi-5"  
          Mode:Managed  Frequency:5.18 GHz  Access Point: 38:EA:A7:80:E8:24   
          Bit Rate=78 Mb/s   Tx-Power=16 dBm   
          Retry  long limit:7   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
          Encryption key:off
          Power Management:on
          Link Quality=44/70  Signal level=-66 dBm  
          Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0
          Tx excessive retries:8  Invalid misc:17   Missed beacon:0



It works well on 3.12.10-300.fc20.x86_64.
Yes there are some errors in dmesg but it doesn't affect me.

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2014-02-28 18:35:13 UTC
kernel-3.13.5-200.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.