From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: 2.6.36-rc4/iwl: warning triggered in net/mac80211/scan.c:266 Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:14:39 +0200 Message-ID: <20100914151439.GA13028@redhat.com> References: <20100914142814.GA8744@redhat.com> <1284474988.3704.10.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "John W. Linville" , "David S. Miller" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Reinette Chatre , Wey-Yi Guy , Intel Linux Wireless , Stanislaw Gruszka To: Johannes Berg Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:7594 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752888Ab0INPVA (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:21:00 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1284474988.3704.10.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 04:36:28PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 16:28 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > I am running 2.6.36-rc4 on T60 with an iwlagn wireless card: > > 03:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless 5100 AGN [Shiloh] Network Connection > > > > I was compiling a large file which stressed the box heavily, and the > > following warning in net/mac80211/scan.c triggered: > > > > /* > > * It's ok to abort a not-yet-running scan (that > > * we have one at all will be verified by checking > > * local->scan_req next), but not to complete it > > * successfully. > > */ > > if (WARN_ON(!local->scanning && !aborted)) > > aborted = true; > > > > dmesg below: > > > > [84379.361297] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > > [84379.361307] WARNING: at net/mac80211/scan.c:266 ieee80211_scan_completed+0x43/0x17f() > > > Should this happen? Does anyone care? > > I am not sure how reproducible this is. > > No, it shouldn't happen. But there are various races in iwlwifi that can > cause this. Stanislaw has fixed them recently, but it's a fairly large > patchset. I'm not sure, but I don't think this is really new in .36. > > johannes So ... get back to you after 2.6.37? -- MST