On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 10:13 -0800, reinette chatre wrote: > [ 729.672010] [<ffffffff812aff1b>] skb_queue_tail+0x2b/0x60 > [ 729.672010] [<ffffffffa04b11f5>] ieee80211_release_reorder_frame+0x35/0x50 [mac80211] So Christian beat me to looking at the trace and pointed out that skb_queue_tail has no business here, we've intentionally not initialised the spinlock. The patch below should fix it. I suppose I never had actual reordering in my tests. johannes --- net/mac80211/rx.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) --- wireless-testing.orig/net/mac80211/rx.c 2009-12-03 20:13:44.000000000 +0100 +++ wireless-testing/net/mac80211/rx.c 2009-12-03 20:13:50.000000000 +0100 @@ -570,7 +570,7 @@ static void ieee80211_release_reorder_fr rate = &sband->bitrates[status->rate_idx]; tid_agg_rx->stored_mpdu_num--; tid_agg_rx->reorder_buf[index] = NULL; - skb_queue_tail(frames, skb); + __skb_queue_tail(frames, skb); no_frame: tid_agg_rx->head_seq_num = seq_inc(tid_agg_rx->head_seq_num); -- 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
