This device was found to be passing only a small amount of data. Examining dmesg found the following. [ 3.017898] usbcore: registered new interface driver mt76x0u Multiple entries: [ 259.411503] mt76u_process_rx_entry: 68 callbacks suppressed [ 259.411525] usb 1-1: rx data too big 2044 [ 259.517895] usb 1-1: rx data too big 2044 [ 259.621517] usb 1-1: rx data too big 2044 [ 259.622193] usb 1-1: rx data too big 2044 [ 259.730383] usb 1-1: rx data too big 2044 [ 259.835789] usb 1-1: rx data too big 2044 [ 259.838003] usb 1-1: rx data too big 2044 [ 260.040689] usb 1-1: rx data too big 2044 [ 260.150328] usb 1-1: rx data too big 2044 [ 260.354527] usb 1-1: rx data too big 2044
could you please try this series? https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10969843/
(In reply to Lorenzo Bianconi from comment #1) > could you please try this series? > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10969843/ Thank you that patch has resolved my issue.
(In reply to Stuart Foster from comment #2) > (In reply to Lorenzo Bianconi from comment #1) > > could you please try this series? > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10969843/ > > Thank you that patch has resolved my issue. Thx a lot for testing. Could you please add your 'tested-by' to the series?
Yes I will (Just as soon as I get my registration completed with Patchwork).
Still trying !!
Given up, are you going to add the patch to 5.2 ?
It seems that this bug made it into 5.2: on Arch Linux with 5.2 my dmesg output was littered with usb 4-3: rx data too big 2044 and wifi performance was abysmal. From my point of view, this is a regression, as downgrading to 5.1.16 makes it go away. Unfortunately, I'm not sure how to test the above patch, though with a bit of guidance I might be able to.
Created attachment 283665 [details] Downloaded patch This is the patch refered to in the bug. Are you able to build your kernel (5.2) from source ?
I managed to build 5.2 with the patch and am happy to report that it fixes all issues. Thank you!
I am please, hopefully the fix will get into linux 5.2 eventually.
It looks like this and other changes are scheduled for linux 5.3.
Just done a quick test on linux 5.3-rc1 and I can confirm that the changes are present and are working ok.