On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 17:36 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 17:17 +0300, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > >> On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 10:20 -0400, Bob Copeland wrote: > >> > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> I wish I had time to set up, an ath5k in AP mode. There are rumors that > >> > >> it works more or less now, then I could use the same beacon frame to > >> > >> test. > >> > > > >> > > It does and if it doesn't its a bug. > >> > > >> > Just FYI, it's known to have problems if the STA uses power saving -- > >> > ath5k never updates the beacon. I have a patch that should work in the > >> > relevant bugzilla but I haven't been back to retest it (at first I > >> > thought it was causing hangs, but later realized the hangs were due to > >> > other bugs in w-t). > >> > > >> > > > > I was just able to reproduce that bug on latest wireless-testing that I > > belive contains the patches you sent for me to test. > > Latest wireless-testing *does* have those patches. Yes I know, just to be sure. > > > I reproduced it against ath5k running in AP mode at home. > > > > I finally made the ath5k send beacons (although not much works besides > > this). > > > > > > Note that I noticed that this bug > > You can get an oops when trying to associate to your ath5k AP? And its > easily reproducible? What driver to you use as the STA? Can you > provide a trace? > > > happens once at boot, if I set NM to > > use system settings, > > What does this mean? Well, I can't say for sure, but it appears that if I asccociate with AP, then I repeat this, I don't see this bug again. > > > when I try to connect again it doesn't happen. Its > > a race condition after all. > > Is the oops not crashing your box? How are you able to try again? What > does trying again mean? Well, its not an oops on my system long ago. I have converted the BUG_ON to printk, and so far I havent see any side effects. However I don't want you just to remove this check, unless it is bogus. (Because it will bury the bug deeper). On the other hand I see no reason to convert it to WARN_ON so it won't oops user systems. I am talking about BUG_ON(!country_ie_regdomain); in net/wireless/reg.c > > Luis -- 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
