On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Thing is, I'm not totally convinced it is wrong to the code while it may >> > or may not be wrong... >> >> Doesn't should be bss pinned int he bss list if you are associating to >> it. If it's not there you don't have access to it's info It looks very >> wrong to me. > > Well, yes, it is a bit odd. > >> > I think this patch should go in first as it >> > actually fixes the oops, and then we can discuss the merits of adding a >> > warning there separately. Maybe after we look a bit at the code and try >> > to figure out whether it can still happen after that patch from >> > Abhijeet. >> >> I'm not sure if this patch is complete without this warning. What is >> in the else statement is a hack and it should be obvious. > > Considering that the message won't help us at all, why bother? We know > it's triggering, we know this might be a problem, and we know we can > only solve it by auditing the code. So why add a message that will get > us countless emails/complaints from people we cannot do anything about > anyway without doing the audit? As I understand it's not easily reproducible so you need reference point in the trace when it happens. I'm not sure what your debug techniques are, though. Tomas > johannes > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
