From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from ms16-1.1blu.de ([89.202.0.34]:51125 "EHLO ms16-1.1blu.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756598Ab1KNXR3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:17:29 -0500 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 00:16:21 +0100 From: Lars Schotte To: wwguy Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: iwlagn 3.0.9 aggreggation messages Message-ID: <20111115001621.0f89db2f@hana.gusto> (sfid-20111115_001734_974766_9853FD0E) In-Reply-To: <1321311573.1796.35.camel@wwguy-ubuntu> References: <20111114131642.31e8ddbd@hana.gusto> <1321283410.13578.33.camel@wwguy-ubuntu> <20111114201947.58d5fdf6@hana.gusto> <1321303101.1796.8.camel@wwguy-ubuntu> <20111114221847.2ca32e6a@hana.gusto> <1321305750.1796.11.camel@wwguy-ubuntu> <20111114224718.491c1777@hana.gusto> <1321307098.1796.14.camel@wwguy-ubuntu> <20111114232852.2372a032@hana.gusto> <1321310502.1796.21.camel@wwguy-ubuntu> <20111114235636.24c85fc3@hana.gusto> <1321311573.1796.35.camel@wwguy-ubuntu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: i looked over some changelogs .. from the linux kernel 3.1 branch. i saw that you ve introduced some patches to this, or you at least signed them off. the changelog also says that you've changed the logging level for that aggregation problem, so even if it would be there, it doesnt pop up on kernel 3.1's. i also did read there that there was like waiting for a real reason to move to aggregation. so it was there the whole time, only it did not write itself out on the log. so i am not sure if we were not just hunting ghosts here. On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 14:59:33 -0800 wwguy wrote: > ok, thanks > > please do let us know if it appear on 3.1.1 > > at the meantime, we will look into how to backport to 3.0.x > > Regards > Wey > > On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 14:56 -0800, Lars Schotte wrote: > > i definitely see it in 3.0.8 and 3.0.9. > > > > on the fedora fc16 linux kernel 3.1.1 it did not yet appear, but > > that may change. > > > > so maybe it would be worth a look if it is not fixed by 3.1.1, or if > > something changed. however ... if it is a FIX, it should definitely > > be fixed also in 3.0.X branch. > > > > so that message still is there on 3.0.9 and 3.0.8, we will see about > > the more current ones. > > > > On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 14:41:42 -0800 > > wwguy wrote: > > > > > so youno longer seeing the issue? > > > > > > Wey > > > > > > > > -- Lars Schotte @ Hana (F16)