On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Florian Engelhardt <flo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:01:08 -0800, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Bob Copeland <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >>> >>> Ok, fair enough. We should try to figure out where the 0x5d and 0x43 >>> come from. It could be memory corruption, for example, but 0x5d and >>> 0x43 aren't poison values. You may try turning on slub/slab debugging >>> just to be sure. >> >> He noted he sees this with iwl drivers though., Florian, please >> correct me if I'm wrong. > > You are right. Any news on this? > > i attached a new scan from the Laptop with intel chipset (iwlagn module). > The first Cell ist the correct access point the second cell with the same > ESSID doesn't exist. I don't know why iwlist scan finds this AP. Please consider burrying iwlist and iwconfig under some ditch and use iw. > The > Problem with all this is very annoying, even unloading iwlagn, iwlcore, > mac80211 and cfg80211 and reloading all these modules does not help. Why are you reporting iwlagn stuff on the ath5k devel list? You also did not provide feedback on the AP, whether you asked its admin about its config nor if it can be rebooted. 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
