[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: kernel BUG in iwl-agn-rs.c:2076, WAS: iwlagn + some accesspoint == hardlock
    On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 05:15 -0700, Nils Radtke wrote:
    > #
    > # To address (1), could you please run with attached debug patch and also
    > # enable rate scaling debugging. That will be "modprobe iwlagn
    > # debug=0x143fff).
    > drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c: In function ‘rs_collect_tx_data’:
    > drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c:364: error: ‘priv’ undeclared (first use in this function)
    > drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c:364: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
    > drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rs.c:364: error: for each function it appears in.)
    > This happens when compiling w/ the patch applied cleanly against .33.3
    > I'll try to fix it, then conduct the field test.

    Sorry ... and thanks.

    > For the latter, do
    > you need the same kind of log as for the previous one?

    The goal of this patch is to find the reason behind the error
    "expected_tpt should have been calculated by now". From what I
    understand you only encountered that in one of your tests, not all. Any
    test you can run to reproduce that error will be welcome.

    Thinking about your question more ... I believe your previous debug logs
    were created with debug flag 0x43fff. For this iteration, please use
    debug flag 0x143fff.

    > # Regarding (2): This is a common issue in busy environments where AP
    > # decides to deathenticate station after it does not receive an ack for
    > # data sent after a few retries. Was this test done in busy environment?
    > Both. This happens in busy environment as well as in an idle one. Can't tell
    > yet whether there're more of those msgs in busy env. I start to feel against
    > Cisco APs..

    I don't know ... perhaps these APs have been set up to be strict wrt

    > # Regarding (3): Seems like driver is getting a request to scan after a
    > # request to remove interface. I am still inquiring about this.
    > Probably due to me switching of via RF_KILLSWITCH. But anyway I assume this
    > msg should not happen..

    Absolutely. What are the exact steps you run when you encounter this


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2010-05-20 20:35    [W:0.021 / U:0.340 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site