Hi, This issue is confirmed here too. But during compile, there is warning about cancel_work_sync(), cancel_delayed_work_sync() should be used instead. And, without the modification in iwl3945_rfkill_poll() and iwl3945_mac_stop(), just with one line cancel_delayed_work_sync(), this issue is also fixed in my testing. Best regards Huaxu PS: The following is the log when iwl3945 was unloaded before patched. root@Januty-devel:~# modprobe -r iwl3945 [ 164.840610] iwl3945: U iwl3945_pci_remove *** UNLOAD DRIVER *** [ 164.846515] iwl3945: U __iwl3945_down iwl3945 is going down [ 164.852315] iwl3945: U iwl3945_hw_nic_stop_master stop master [ 164.858634] iwl3945: U iwl3945_clear_free_frames 0 frames on pre-allocated heap on clear. [ 164.917177] iwl3945: U __iwl3945_down iwl3945 is going down [ 164.922735] iwl3945: U iwl3945_clear_free_frames 0 frames on pre-allocated heap on clear. [ 166.804090] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 000077ff8b64b8c7 [ 166.808082] IP: [<ffffffff80262b62>] delayed_work_timer_fn+0x32/0x40 [ 166.808082] PGD 0 [ 166.808082] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP [ 166.808082] last sysfs file: /sys/module/cfg80211/refcnt [ 166.808082] Dumping ftrace buffer: [ 166.808082] (ftrace buffer empty) [ 166.808082] CPU 1 [ 166.808082] Modules linked in: lp parport arc4 ecb psmouse iTCO_wdt video serio_raw pcspkr usbhid intel_agp iTCO_vendor_support output ehci_hcd uhci_hcd ] [ 166.808082] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.28.8 #1 [ 166.808082] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff80262b62>] [<ffffffff80262b62>] delayed_work_timer_fn+0x32/0x40 [ 166.808082] RSP: 0018:ffff88007b62be80 EFLAGS: 00010246 [ 166.808082] RAX: 000077ff8b64b8bf RBX: ffff8800738df7c8 RCX: ffff8800738df7c8 [ 166.808082] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: ffff8800738df7c8 RDI: ffff8800738df7c8 [ 166.808082] RBP: ffff88007b62be80 R08: ffff8800738df820 R09: 0000000000000000 [ 166.808082] R10: ffff88007b625e18 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000100 [ 166.808082] R13: ffff88007b614000 R14: ffff88007b62beb0 R15: ffffffff80262b30 [ 166.808082] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88007bc02c00(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 166.808082] CS: 0010 DS: 0018 ES: 0018 CR0: 000000008005003b [ 166.808082] CR2: 000077ff8b64b8c7 CR3: 0000000000201000 CR4: 00000000000006a0 [ 166.808082] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 [ 166.808082] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 [ 166.808082] Process swapper (pid: 0, threadinfo ffff88007b624000, task ffff88007b61c320) [ 166.808082] Stack: [ 166.808082] ffff88007b62bef0 ffffffff80259e39 ffff88007b615c18 ffff88007b615818 [ 166.808082] ffff88007b615418 ffff88007b615018 ffff88007b62beb0 ffff88007b62beb0 [ 166.808082] ffffffff80271efd 0000000000000008 0000000000000001 0000000000000100 [ 166.808082] Call Trace: [ 166.808082] <IRQ> <0> [<ffffffff80259e39>] run_timer_softirq+0x179/0x260 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff80271efd>] ? tick_handle_oneshot_broadcast+0xed/0x100 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff80254cfc>] __do_softirq+0x9c/0x170 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff80213cac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff80214f0d>] do_softirq+0x5d/0xa0 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff80254a7d>] irq_exit+0x8d/0xa0 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff802151d5>] do_IRQ+0xc5/0x110 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff80212b13>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0x29 [ 166.808082] <EOI> <0> [<ffffffff8046d906>] ? acpi_idle_enter_simple+0x166/0x1a4 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff8046d8fe>] ? acpi_idle_enter_simple+0x15e/0x1a4 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff805745a5>] ? cpuidle_idle_call+0xa5/0x100 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff80210e85>] ? cpu_idle+0x65/0xc0 [ 166.808082] [<ffffffff8067e6fd>] ? start_secondary+0x168/0x1bb [ 166.808082] Code: 65 8b 14 25 24 00 00 00 48 89 e5 48 83 e0 fc 48 8b 40 38 8b 70 20 48 8b 00 85 f6 0f 45 15 ff c9 72 00 48 f7 d0 48 89 ce 48 63 d2 <48> 8 [ 166.808082] RIP [<ffffffff80262b62>] delayed_work_timer_fn+0x32/0x40 [ 166.808082] RSP <ffff88007b62be80> [ 166.808082] CR2: 000077ff8b64b8c7 [ 167.086916] Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception in interrupt On 21:22 Tue 24 Mar, TJ wrote: > On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 18:51 +0100, Helmut Schaa wrote: > > Am Dienstag, 24. März 2009 schrieb TJ: > > > Tim Gardner suggested I forward this as a possible stable-release > > > update. I found the problem in our current Ubuntu Jaunty tree - iwlwifi > > > version 1.2.26k. What follows is a copy of the patch for Jaunty > > > (2.6.28). > > > > The patch that introduced the rfkill polling did not hit mainline yet. It > > should pop up in 2.6.30, hence this patch is not needed for any stable > > series. > > > > I wasn't able to reproduce the issue by unloading iwl3945 here. Any hints > > on how to reproduce this issue? > > lspci -nn -s 06:00.0 > 06:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless 3945ABG [Golan] Network Connection [8086:4222] (rev 02) > > With the interface active and in use do: > > sudo modprobe -r iwl3945 > > Approximately 2 seconds later the PC locks solid and requires a > power-off button restart. > > Confirmed by another of our kernel team: > > https://launchpad.net/bugs/345710 > > -- > 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 -- 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
