Reinette, Thanks for the comprehensive test. > * I tried this patch on top of latest wireless-testing (rc8 based) on a > Sony laptop. After I bring the interface up I enabled rfkill and saw a > gpf in the sony-laptop module (log is below). I tried this test many > times after this and did not see this gpf again. > > * I tried to load the modules with rfkill enabled and then disabled > rfkill after interface up - that worked fine. > > * In another test I had rfkill disabled and successfully associated with > AP. I then enabled rfkill and was disassociated as expected. I then > disabled rfkill again and used "iwconfig" to reassociate successfully. > > * In another test rfkill was disabled and I associated with AP. I then > enabled and disabled rfkill rapidly and did not loose association. > > In summary the testing went very well. There was that one gpf that > clouded the testing a bit. I have no idea how it can be connected to the > rfkill work though because the error appear to be contained in the > sony-laptop module. That looks like an error in sony-laptop, indeed. Should we go ahead with the iwlwifi part then? > [ 709.366404] general protection fault: 0000 [#1] SMP > [ 709.366551] last sysfs file: /sys/class/rfkill/rfkill5/state > [ 709.366616] CPU 1 > [ 709.369182] Pid: 66, comm: kacpi_notify Not tainted 2.6.30-rc8-wl #40 VGN-Z540N > [ 709.369182] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffffa0200dda>] [<ffffffffa0200dda>] sony_nc_rfkill_set+0xa/0x40 [sony_laptop] > [ 709.369182] RSP: 0018:ffff8800bb663dc0 EFLAGS: 00010286 > [ 709.369182] RAX: 0000000000000001 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000000001 > [ 709.369182] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000000000001 RDI: ffff880036f74480 > [ 709.369182] RBP: ffff8800bb663dd0 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 > [ 709.369182] R10: 0000000000000001 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: 0000000000000000 > [ 709.369182] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ffff8800bb663df0 > [ 709.369182] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88000105e000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > [ 709.369182] CS: 0010 DS: 0018 ES: 0018 CR0: 000000008005003b > [ 709.369182] CR2: 00007ffff2051000 CR3: 00000000ba6b6000 CR4: 00000000000006e0 > [ 709.369182] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > [ 709.369182] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > [ 709.369182] Process kacpi_notify (pid: 66, threadinfo ffff8800bb662000, task ffff8800bb658f40) > [ 709.369182] Stack: > [ 709.369182] 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ffff8800bb663e20 ffffffffa0203292 > [ 709.369182] ffff8800bb659548 0000000000000246 0000000000000202 ffff8800b729e2f8 > [ 709.369182] ffff8800b5371898 ffff8800bb658f40 ffff880001058ec0 ffffffff803b5596 > [ 709.369182] Call Trace: > [ 709.369182] [<ffffffffa0203292>] sony_nc_notify+0x222/0x260 [sony_laptop] > [ 709.369182] [<ffffffff803b5596>] ? acpi_os_execute_deferred+0x0/0x39 > [ 709.369182] [<ffffffff803b8192>] acpi_device_notify+0x14/0x16 I wonder if sony has a race condition somewhere against itself. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
