From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758909AbZBVXYb (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 18:24:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756682AbZBVXU6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 18:20:58 -0500 Received: from mail-fx0-f167.google.com ([209.85.220.167]:52231 "EHLO mail-fx0-f167.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757435AbZBVXUz (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 18:20:55 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=hcv8oCe7aX9AUaPP1ZEZo7Ry0/VPjzgip4lhe1NmSLeoKYJsJE7McecrkNpv1vmgiA cz7HyoWxwdYnTKjPuohD3A1RM84/m4BGuCxwag89E3bkys9d+vZp6qV9zx/K83T/QIMz ah5fsWspxCwIA2bb6FlkWn0XfXoKe2lupylBE= Message-ID: <49A1DDD2.7040706@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:20:50 +0100 From: Jiri Slaby User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090218 SUSE/3.0b2-1.1 Thunderbird/3.0b2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sitsofe Wheeler CC: Frederic Weisbecker , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath5k-devel@venema.h4ckr.net, Nick Kossifidis , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Bob Copeland Subject: Re: [TIP] BUG kmalloc-4096: Poison overwritten (ath5k_rx_skb_alloc) References: <20090222111807.GB5538@silver.sucs.org> <49A13E91.1090601@gmail.com> <20090222122036.GC5538@silver.sucs.org> <20090222144742.GA6078@nowhere> <20090222170201.GA27360@silver.sucs.org> <49A1CA01.9030501@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <49A1CA01.9030501@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 22.2.2009 22:56, Jiri Slaby wrote: > Well, maybe we should try to reproduce with jumbo packets sent to the > ath5k receiver, since I think it (1) is not very much test-covered code > (2) appears to be related. According to the spec I have for older chip, there is not `done' flag set for descriptors which have `more' flag set. We handle this wrongly. Am I looking correctly, Nick, Luis, Bob? I still don't see what could have caused this though.