On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 12:01:01PM -0800, Luis Rodriguez wrote: > On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 07:36:07AM -0800, Peter Stuge wrote: > > Ben Greear wrote: > > > > but at least other clueless users would not go over stable limit > > > > you have found. > > > > > > I think it's very likely that the problems I find are general > > > issues that are just much easier to hit with lots of stations. > > > > I strongly support this. I recognize several of your problems from my > > attempts at using ath9k with only a single STA which was all but stable. > > Sure, see my other e-mail. > > > > There is probably no 'safe' number of stations...just takes longer > > > to see bugs with fewer stations. > > > > > > For instance, you still see the failure-to-stop-DMA errors with a > > > single station, right? And the tx locking stuff was just easier to > > > exercise with lots of stations, but it would have been possible to > > > hit it with 2 stations. > > > > > > The current tx-hang stuff I'm chasing seems like logic bugs in the > > > queueing, probably nothing in particular about the chipset. > > > > This is also my impression. Since it is important for Atheros to have > > bugzilla reports rather than discussion on list > > I'm trying to tell you how you can more efficiently work with developers > on reporting issues, I'm not singling you out but I am telling you that > the energy you spend on complaining on things not being addressed can be > better put on reporting issues more efficiently. > > Reporting issues on the list helps but what helps is a describin the > issue for a specific release but the most difficult thing to do sometimes > is to come up with a recipe for a way to reproduce a specific issue. Without > this it is harder to debug issues. If you can come up with ways to reproduce > issues then it becomes easier for engineers to start digging. Additionally > if an issue is seen that was not observed before the reporter may also > do a git bisect to try to identify the culprit commit. Be aware though that > bisecting on wireless-testing can only be done against the master-* tags, > and not on the entire tree due to the way John updates his tree. If you > see the issue on a stable kernel though you can just use Linus' tree or > the linux-2.6-allstable git tree which will have the stable extra versioned > kernels as well. > > Reporting issues for stable kernels should go through the kernel bugzilla, > but can start off on the mailing list. ath9k-devel though is not ideal for > reporting major issues and I recommend linux-wireless to be used instead > for that. If an issue is reporting for wireless-testing with a good series > of reproducible steps chances are very high it will be addressed. Motivated > highly technical users willing to help further get bonus points if they go > the extra mile and bisect. > > Furthermore, issues can be kept track on here: > > http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Drivers/ath9k/bugs > > This keeps track of major issues reported, and what people are working on. I'll also note: http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Documentation/Reporting_bugs If this needs update feel free to edit. The hope is to make it easier for users to identify issues and report them properly. 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
