From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: Mark IPW2100 as BROKEN: Fatal interrupt. Scheduling firmware restart. Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 13:27:53 -0700 Message-ID: <20080921132753.5689b564@infradead.org> References: <20080921172316.GA6306@2ka.mipt.ru> <20080921110422.1d010b96@infradead.org> <20080921182835.GA11473@2ka.mipt.ru> <20080921113513.16677c4e@infradead.org> <20080921190050.GA20484@2ka.mipt.ru> <1222024444.3023.53.camel@johannes.berg> <20080921193809.GA8735@2ka.mipt.ru> <20080921124332.67ddc13a@infradead.org> <20080921202057.GB25052@2ka.mipt.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Johannes Berg , netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, ipw2100-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, yi.zhu-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, reinette.chatre-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, jgarzik-e+AXbWqSrlAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, linville-2XuSBdqkA4R54TAoqtyWWQ@public.gmane.org, davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org To: Evgeniy Polyakov Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080921202057.GB25052-9fLWQ3dKdXwox3rIn2DAYQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-wireless-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 00:20:57 +0400 Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 12:43:32PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven > (arjan-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org) wrote: > > > @@ -3174,6 +3176,10 @@ static void ipw2100_irq_tasklet(struct > > > ipw2100_priv *priv) if (inta & IPW2100_INTA_FATAL_ERROR) { > > > printk(KERN_WARNING DRV_NAME > > > ": Fatal interrupt. Scheduling firmware > > > restart.\n"); > > > + WARN_ON(1); > > > + > > > + BUG_ON(ipw2100_max_fatal_ints-- <= 0); > > > > BUG_ON in interrupt context is just extremely hostile, since it > > means the box is dead. > > > > also I would suggest using WARN_ON_ONCE() > > Well, I actually wanted to have a bug there because of it, but now I > think that annoying repeated warning is enough to bring attention to > the problem by putting bug information into some magic special place > called kerneloops collection. are you more interested in bringing attention than finding something that makes the driver work ? I sort of am getting that impression and I'd be disappointed if that is the case. > > Consider for inclusing for the upcoming kernel to get wider > notifications. Yes, it is not a bugfix, I know. still more complex than needed; a WARN_ON_ONCE() will be enough. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html