From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756205Ab1G2KoQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2011 06:44:16 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:25977 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755946Ab1G2KoP (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2011 06:44:15 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 12:45:37 +0200 From: Stanislaw Gruszka To: Andi Kleen Cc: gregkh@suse.de, herton.krzesinski@canonical.com, gengor@gentoo.org, donald.h.fry@intel.com, wey-yi.w.guy@intel.com, ak@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org, tim.bird@am.sony.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] [64/99] Revert "iwlagn: Support new 5000 microcode." Message-ID: <20110729104537.GB2106@redhat.com> References: <20110727247.325703029@firstfloor.org> <20110727214903.75C262403FF@tassilo.jf.intel.com> <20110728082425.GA2207@redhat.com> <20110728173241.GJ8006@one.firstfloor.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110728173241.GJ8006@one.firstfloor.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 07:32:41PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > commit dd7a2509b3a79b290730a9c6a784bf03fedabb9a > > Author: Johannes Berg > > Date: Wed Apr 28 23:33:10 2010 -0700 > > > > iwlagn: implement loading a new firmware file type > > > > > This was reported by Gentoo, Arch, and Canonical developers as causing > > > problems for their users: > > > https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/24302 > > This is a bug about 2.6.32. > > > > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=359445 > > This looks like problem when only 8.83.5 (v5) firmware is available > > on the system, but kernel is old and support only v2 version. This > > should be solved by providing both old 8.24.2 (v2) and new 8.83.5 (v5) > > firmware blobs in one package. > > > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/796336 > > Also 2.6.32 case. > > I took them from .32. Should I drop them? Reverting support for v5 firmware in .32 is ok. > > There could be reasons for this change, but I do not see them here. > > Can you please clearly indicate which patches I should drop and which keep? You already decided to drop this patch for now, good. I can observe lot's of "Received BA when not expected" when new firmware is used, not happen with old firmware. So this commit should be picked from upstream: commit bfd36103ec26599557c2bd3225a1f1c9267f8fcb Author: Stanislaw Gruszka Date: Fri Apr 29 17:51:06 2011 +0200 iwlagn: fix "Received BA when not expected" However we already applied it on 2.6.35 based Fedora-14 kernel (together with some other iwlwifi patches), and get report about regression. So I need to figure this out. I'm going to look more at the issue, and possibly post some backport patches, when solve problems. For now, I think we should not do anything with iwlwifi in 2.6.35, as long nobody will report some regression. Stanislaw