linux-kernel - Re: iwlagn is getting very shaky

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1319074339.31823.68.camel@wwguy-huron>
Date:	Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:32:19 -0700
From:	"Guy, Wey-Yi" <wey-yi.w.guy@...el.com>
To:	Norbert Preining <preining@...ic.at>
Cc:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"ipw3945-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<ipw3945-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	"ilw@...ux.intel.com" <ilw@...ux.intel.com>,
	"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: iwlagn is getting very shaky

On Wed, 2011-10-19 at 19:02 -0700, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mi, 19 Okt 2011, wwguy wrote:
> > instead of having you to revert the patch I ask you to do, could you
> > please just apply the patch I attach here and see if it make any
> > differences? it is also for debugging purpose, so please check the dmesg
> > log.
> 
> Do you mean the patch you send with a strange date:
> Signed-off-by: Wey-Yi Guy <wey-yi.w.guy@...el.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-tx.c |    5 +++++
>  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-tx.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-tx.c
> index 863c43f..5a87071 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-tx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-tx.c
> @@ -812,8 +812,13 @@ int iwlagn_rx_reply_tx(struct iwl_priv *priv, struct
> iwl_rx_mem_buffer *rxb,
>                         if (status == TX_STATUS_FAIL_PASSIVE_NO_RX &&
>                             iwl_is_associated_ctx(ctx) && ctx->vif &&
>                             ctx->vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION) {
> +#if 0
>                                 ctx->last_tx_rejected = true;
>                                 iwl_trans_stop_queue(trans(priv), txq_id);
> +#endif
> +IWL_ERR(priv,
> +       "Encounter TX_STATUS_FAIL_PASSIVE_NO_RX, am I on 5.2G band? (%d)\n",
> +       txq_id);
> 
>                                 IWL_DEBUG_TX_REPLY(priv,
>                                            "TXQ %d status %s (0x%08x) "
> --
> 1.7.0.4
> 
> It does not apply at all, I cannot even find
> 	rejected
> in iwl-agn-tx.c.
> 
> On which tree is that based, can you provide a patch against main
> git branch of Linus.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
Let's try this and see if apply. btw, are you on 5GHz?

Thanks
Wey


View attachment "0001-iwlagn-stop-queue-testing.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (1110 bytes)