From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from vs166246.vserver.de ([62.75.166.246]:48742 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932874AbYD3VAL (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:00:11 -0400 From: Michael Buesch To: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT 0/4] mac80211 QoS-related enhancements Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:59:47 +0200 Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <20080430124055.091382000@sipsolutions.net> <1209560849.18659.1.camel@johannes.berg> In-Reply-To: <1209560849.18659.1.camel@johannes.berg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Message-Id: <200804302259.47950.mb@bu3sch.de> (sfid-20080430_230009_713472_1970555C) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wednesday 30 April 2008 15:07:29 Johannes Berg wrote: > > > Any testing of this series is welcome, even just the first patch by itself > > (especially with drivers other than b43), it doesn't make sense to test with > > patch 2 and not 3 though, so if you're going to test one by one treat 2/3 as > > a set. > > I have, of course, tested this series with b43 (and founds dozens of > bugs...) Michael, thanks for your dma overflow injection feature :) :) > One thing that turned up was that if I enable dma overflow with this > patchset then b43 hardware spews lots of PHY TX errors. I have verified > that the ieee80211_tx_control info is correct, and the frame data is > also fine, so I'm not sure what's up there. Could that be unrelated to > this patch? I haven't tested dma overflow injection w/o this series yet. Hm, not sure. It could be a b43 bug, of course. But last time I tested the overflow injection, it worked fine. And that's not too long ago. Probably 3 or 4 weeks. Of course, we should test this again with the QOS patch applied and removed now. If that patch does actually trigger it, then we probably still need to search for a b43 bug. Is the QOS callback (forgot its name) called when we have an overflow? -- Greetings Michael.