| Message ID | 20080921193809.GA8735@2ka.mipt.ru |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Headers | show |
[Evgeniy Polyakov - Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 11:38:09PM +0400]
| Hi.
|
| On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 09:14:04PM +0200, Johannes Berg (johannes@sipsolutions.net) wrote:
| > > Do you want me to implement ipw2100 driver as a big work structure
| > > which will run ipw2100_init()/wait/ipw2100_exit() in a loop?
| > > And that will be the fix suggested by Intel? That would explain a lot.
| >
| > I think what Arjan is saying is that it would be better to put pressure
| > on the responsible folks (I don't think Arjan is anywhere near them at
|
| Both maintainers were added to the copy list.
|
| > all) if you'd put in a WARN_ON() for this error and that would make the
| > top entry on kerneloops.org all the time... And additionally put in a
| > workaround for yourself for now.
|
| As I pointed, I can rewrite the whole driver's initialization process,
| so that it looked like init/wait/exit loop, which can be processed at
| the module load and when fatal interrupt fires. Do this a fix? This is
| not even a remotely workaround. We can just add
| rmmod/modprobe/ifdown/ifup to the crontab job. Another users reported in
| bugzilla that they needed to reboot a machine to make card working
| again. I'm not sure that user tried to do a rmmod/modprobe though.
|
| > And can we keep the flames off this list please? That comment from Wei
| > Weng was absolutely uncalled for, and inciting a flamewar (as you have
| > already blogged) was not really productive either.
|
| If we will keep silence, no one will notice that problem exists.
|
| I do hope this will result in a progress. Arjan, do you aggree to add
| this patch to the current tree?
|
| diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100.c
| index 19a401c..9a7b64c 100644
| --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100.c
| +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100.c
| @@ -206,6 +206,8 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(disable, "manually disable the radio (default 0 [radio on])");
|
| static u32 ipw2100_debug_level = IPW_DL_NONE;
|
| +static int ipw2100_max_fatal_ints = 10;
| +
| #ifdef CONFIG_IPW2100_DEBUG
| #define IPW_DEBUG(level, message...) \
| do { \
| @@ -3174,6 +3176,10 @@ static void ipw2100_irq_tasklet(struct ipw2100_priv *priv)
| if (inta & IPW2100_INTA_FATAL_ERROR) {
| printk(KERN_WARNING DRV_NAME
| ": Fatal interrupt. Scheduling firmware restart.\n");
| + WARN_ON(1);
| +
| + BUG_ON(ipw2100_max_fatal_ints-- <= 0);
| +
| priv->inta_other++;
| write_register(dev, IPW_REG_INTA, IPW2100_INTA_FATAL_ERROR);
|
|
|
| --
| Evgeniy Polyakov
|
Since it's that serious maybe we should change
IPW_DEBUG_INFO("%s: Fatal error value: 0x%08X\n",
priv->net_dev->name, priv->fatal_error);
to printk(KERN_WARN)? And here is why - as I see now we can't say what
exactly is wrong - Evgeniy said he has a suspicious about firmware so
this WARNS will be collected by Arjan thru kerneloops and we could not
ask users to change debug level and repost problem - oops will have it
by default - and if it really firmware problem - firmware engineers could
find this _additional_ info usefull and resolve it (probably).
- Cyrill -
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 12:05:18AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov (gorcunov@gmail.com) wrote: > Since it's that serious maybe we should change > > IPW_DEBUG_INFO("%s: Fatal error value: 0x%08X\n", > priv->net_dev->name, priv->fatal_error); > > to printk(KERN_WARN)? And here is why - as I see now we can't say what > exactly is wrong - Evgeniy said he has a suspicious about firmware so > this WARNS will be collected by Arjan thru kerneloops and we could not > ask users to change debug level and repost problem - oops will have it > by default - and if it really firmware problem - firmware engineers could > find this _additional_ info usefull and resolve it (probably). The only reason for this change is to make a mark at the kerneloops. I.e. users know, there is a bug. Developers know, there is a bug. Everyone knows that there is a bug, but until it is at the special place we look to each other just like there is no bug. Here are dumps for example: http://www.intellinuxwireless.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245 Bug existed even with 1.2 firmware and .11 kernel. Intel, that's a great marketing slogan: stability everywhere!
[Evgeniy Polyakov - Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 12:26:56AM +0400]
| On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 12:05:18AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov (gorcunov@gmail.com) wrote:
| > Since it's that serious maybe we should change
| >
| > IPW_DEBUG_INFO("%s: Fatal error value: 0x%08X\n",
| > priv->net_dev->name, priv->fatal_error);
| >
| > to printk(KERN_WARN)? And here is why - as I see now we can't say what
| > exactly is wrong - Evgeniy said he has a suspicious about firmware so
| > this WARNS will be collected by Arjan thru kerneloops and we could not
| > ask users to change debug level and repost problem - oops will have it
| > by default - and if it really firmware problem - firmware engineers could
| > find this _additional_ info usefull and resolve it (probably).
|
| The only reason for this change is to make a mark at the kerneloops.
| I.e. users know, there is a bug. Developers know, there is a bug.
| Everyone knows that there is a bug, but until it is at the special place
| we look to each other just like there is no bug.
|
| Here are dumps for example:
| http://www.intellinuxwireless.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245
|
| Bug existed even with 1.2 firmware and .11 kernel.
| Intel, that's a great marketing slogan: stability everywhere!
|
| --
| Evgeniy Polyakov
|
From dump:
> Sep 25 11:31:39 suino wlan0: TX timed out. Scheduling firmware restart.
yes Evgeniy - all could know that but this register info could help
firmware engineers to distinguish problems (without additional efforts
like ask users to pass debug argument - kerneloops will have it
by default) if there not only one exist. I mean I don't think anyone
would reject additional info about problem ever :)
- Cyrill -
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100.c index 19a401c..9a7b64c 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100.c @@ -206,6 +206,8 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(disable, "manually disable the radio (default 0 [radio on])"); static u32 ipw2100_debug_level = IPW_DL_NONE; +static int ipw2100_max_fatal_ints = 10; + #ifdef CONFIG_IPW2100_DEBUG #define IPW_DEBUG(level, message...) \ do { \ @@ -3174,6 +3176,10 @@ static void ipw2100_irq_tasklet(struct ipw2100_priv *priv) if (inta & IPW2100_INTA_FATAL_ERROR) { printk(KERN_WARNING DRV_NAME ": Fatal interrupt. Scheduling firmware restart.\n"); + WARN_ON(1); + + BUG_ON(ipw2100_max_fatal_ints-- <= 0); + priv->inta_other++; write_register(dev, IPW_REG_INTA, IPW2100_INTA_FATAL_ERROR);