From: reinette chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
To: Nils Radtke <lkml@Think-Future.de>
Cc: "linville@tuxdriver.com" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kernel BUG in iwl-agn-rs.c:2076, WAS: iwlagn + some accesspoint == hardlock
Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 16:32:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1273534324.2370.6740.camel@rchatre-DESK> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100510183639.GA17523@localhost>
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 11:36 -0700, Nils Radtke wrote:
> Today weather was fine again, finally. So testing with .33.3 w/ the patch applied:
>
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=127290931304496&w=2
>
> The kernel kernel .32 was still running before it crashed immediately on wireless activation.
> The crash log showed again at least two messages, the last was as already described in my first
> message, bug from 2010-04-30: I think even the 0x2030 was the same:
>
> EIP rs_tx_status +x8f/x2030
You report an issue on 2.6.32 ...
>
> W/ .33.3 and the above patch applied:
... but then test the patch with 2.6.33.
Which kernel are you focused on?
> Linux mypole 2.6.33.3 #18 SMP PREEMPT Thu May 6 21:51:37 CEST 2010 i686 GNU/Linux
>
> May 10 19:14:11 [ 80.586637] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: expected_tpt should have been calculated by now
> May 10 19:23:17 [ 626.476078] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: expected_tpt should have been calculated by now
> May 10 19:23:30 [ 638.913740] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: expected_tpt should have been calculated by now
> May 10 19:23:32 [ 641.232425] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: expected_tpt should have been calculated by now
> May 10 19:23:54 [ 663.392697] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: expected_tpt should have been calculated by now
> May 10 19:23:58 [ 666.980247] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: expected_tpt should have been calculated by now
> May 10 19:24:02 [ 671.121826] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: expected_tpt should have been calculated by now
Can you see any impact on your connection speed that can be connected to
these messages?
> Additionally these were logged, could you tell why they're there and what to do? (also .33.3 w/ patch)
>
> May 10 19:24:16 [ 685.079617] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: iwl_tx_agg_start on ra = 00:1a:70:12:23:25 tid = 0
> May 10 19:24:22 [ 691.026737] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: iwl_tx_agg_start on ra = 00:1a:70:12:23:25 tid = 0
> May 10 19:28:02 [ 911.406162] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: iwl_tx_agg_start on ra = 00:1a:70:12:23:25 tid = 0
> May 10 19:35:38 [ 1367.251240] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: iwl_tx_agg_start on ra = 00:1a:70:12:23:25 tid = 0
>
> The above "iwl_tx_agg_start" lines happen when connecting - again to a Cisco AP - and the connection gets
> dropped the exact moment when a download is started. It even often drops when dhcp is still negotiating, has
> got it's IP but the nego isn't finished yet. Conn drops, same procedure again and again. This happens only
> with this Cisco AP (which is BTW another one from the "expected_tpt should have been calculated by now"
> problem).
It could be that some of the queues get stuck. Can you try with the
patches in
http://bugzilla.intellinuxwireless.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2037#c113 ? They
are based on 2.6.33.
Reinette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-10 23:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20100503191756.GA3479@localhost>
2010-05-03 19:22 ` kernel BUG in iwl-agn-rs.c:2076, WAS: iwlagn + some accesspoint == hardlock John W. Linville
2010-05-06 9:14 ` Christian Borntraeger
2010-05-06 16:28 ` reinette chatre
2010-05-11 15:50 ` Christian Borntraeger
2010-05-11 17:21 ` reinette chatre
2010-05-12 15:18 ` Christian Borntraeger
2010-05-10 18:36 ` Nils Radtke
2010-05-10 23:32 ` reinette chatre [this message]
2010-05-11 9:41 Nils Radtke
[not found] <1273768269.2295.1144.camel@rchatre-DESK>
2010-05-14 17:45 ` Nils Radtke
[not found] <1274380408.2091.9272.camel@rchatre-DESK>
2010-05-31 20:12 ` Nils Radtke
2010-06-02 17:51 ` reinette chatre
2010-06-04 16:57 ` Nils Radtke
2010-06-08 17:46 ` reinette chatre
2010-06-10 14:22 ` Nils Radtke
2010-06-10 16:19 ` reinette chatre
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1273534324.2370.6740.camel@rchatre-DESK \
--to=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=lkml@Think-Future.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox