I am running 2.6.36-rc4 on T60 with an iwlagn wireless card:
03:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless 5100 AGN [Shiloh] Network Connection
I was compiling a large file which stressed the box heavily, and the
following warning in net/mac80211/scan.c triggered:
/*
* It's ok to abort a not-yet-running scan (that
* we have one at all will be verified by checking
* local->scan_req next), but not to complete it
* successfully.
*/
if (WARN_ON(!local->scanning && !aborted))
aborted = true;
dmesg below:
[84379.361297] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[84379.361307] WARNING: at net/mac80211/scan.c:266 ieee80211_scan_completed+0x43/0x17f()
[84379.361311] Hardware name: 2241B48
[84379.361313] Modules linked in: tun iwlagn kvm_intel kvm iwlcore e1000e thinkpad_acpi [last unloaded: scsi_wait_scan]
[84379.361325] Pid: 8254, comm: kworker/u:0 Not tainted 2.6.36-rc4-mst #96
[84379.361328] Call Trace:
[84379.361334] [<ffffffff815d1399>] ? ieee80211_scan_completed+0x43/0x17f
[84379.361340] [<ffffffff81042046>] warn_slowpath_common+0x80/0x99
[84379.361354] [<ffffffffa005d8e7>] ? iwl_generic_cmd_callback+0x0/0xe4 [iwlcore]
[84379.361359] [<ffffffff81042074>] warn_slowpath_null+0x15/0x17
[84379.361363] [<ffffffff815d1399>] ieee80211_scan_completed+0x43/0x17f
[84379.361374] [<ffffffffa0065212>] iwl_bg_scan_completed+0x1ce/0x1d7 [iwlcore]
[84379.361380] [<ffffffff81057153>] process_one_work+0x1e2/0x301
[84379.361391] [<ffffffffa0065044>] ? iwl_bg_scan_completed+0x0/0x1d7 [iwlcore]
[84379.361395] [<ffffffff8105752c>] worker_thread+0x130/0x243
[84379.361400] [<ffffffff810573fc>] ? worker_thread+0x0/0x243
[84379.361404] [<ffffffff8105bc1b>] kthread+0x81/0x89
[84379.361409] [<ffffffff81003914>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
[84379.361413] [<ffffffff8105bb9a>] ? kthread+0x0/0x89
[84379.361417] [<ffffffff81003910>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10
[84379.361420] ---[ end trace c5ebbd902daa4ea8 ]---
[84379.361422] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[84379.361426] WARNING: at net/mac80211/scan.c:269 ieee80211_scan_completed+0x62/0x17f()
[84379.361429] Hardware name: 2241B48
[84379.361431] Modules linked in: tun iwlagn kvm_intel kvm iwlcore e1000e thinkpad_acpi [last unloaded: scsi_wait_scan]
[84379.361441] Pid: 8254, comm: kworker/u:0 Tainted: G W 2.6.36-rc4-mst #96
[84379.361461] Call Trace:
[84379.361464] [<ffffffff815d13b8>] ? ieee80211_scan_completed+0x62/0x17f
[84379.361469] [<ffffffff81042046>] warn_slowpath_common+0x80/0x99
[84379.361479] [<ffffffffa005d8e7>] ? iwl_generic_cmd_callback+0x0/0xe4 [iwlcore]
[84379.361484] [<ffffffff81042074>] warn_slowpath_null+0x15/0x17
[84379.361488] [<ffffffff815d13b8>] ieee80211_scan_completed+0x62/0x17f
[84379.361503] [<ffffffffa0065212>] iwl_bg_scan_completed+0x1ce/0x1d7 [iwlcore]
[84379.361506] [<ffffffff81057153>] process_one_work+0x1e2/0x301
[84379.361512] [<ffffffffa0065044>] ? iwl_bg_scan_completed+0x0/0x1d7 [iwlcore]
[84379.361515] [<ffffffff8105752c>] worker_thread+0x130/0x243
[84379.361517] [<ffffffff810573fc>] ? worker_thread+0x0/0x243
[84379.361519] [<ffffffff8105bc1b>] kthread+0x81/0x89
[84379.361522] [<ffffffff81003914>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
[84379.361524] [<ffffffff8105bb9a>] ? kthread+0x0/0x89
[84379.361526] [<ffffffff81003910>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10
[84379.361528] ---[ end trace c5ebbd902daa4ea9 ]---
Should this happen? Does anyone care?
I am not sure how reproducible this is.
Thanks,
--
MST
On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 16:28 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> I am running 2.6.36-rc4 on T60 with an iwlagn wireless card:
> 03:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless 5100 AGN [Shiloh] Network Connection
>
> I was compiling a large file which stressed the box heavily, and the
> following warning in net/mac80211/scan.c triggered:
>
> /*
> * It's ok to abort a not-yet-running scan (that
> * we have one at all will be verified by checking
> * local->scan_req next), but not to complete it
> * successfully.
> */
> if (WARN_ON(!local->scanning && !aborted))
> aborted = true;
>
> dmesg below:
>
> [84379.361297] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [84379.361307] WARNING: at net/mac80211/scan.c:266 ieee80211_scan_completed+0x43/0x17f()
> Should this happen? Does anyone care?
> I am not sure how reproducible this is.
No, it shouldn't happen. But there are various races in iwlwifi that can
cause this. Stanislaw has fixed them recently, but it's a fairly large
patchset. I'm not sure, but I don't think this is really new in .36.
johannes
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 04:36:28PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 16:28 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > I am running 2.6.36-rc4 on T60 with an iwlagn wireless card:
> > 03:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless 5100 AGN [Shiloh] Network Connection
> >
> > I was compiling a large file which stressed the box heavily, and the
> > following warning in net/mac80211/scan.c triggered:
> >
> > /*
> > * It's ok to abort a not-yet-running scan (that
> > * we have one at all will be verified by checking
> > * local->scan_req next), but not to complete it
> > * successfully.
> > */
> > if (WARN_ON(!local->scanning && !aborted))
> > aborted = true;
> >
> > dmesg below:
> >
> > [84379.361297] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > [84379.361307] WARNING: at net/mac80211/scan.c:266 ieee80211_scan_completed+0x43/0x17f()
>
> > Should this happen? Does anyone care?
> > I am not sure how reproducible this is.
>
> No, it shouldn't happen. But there are various races in iwlwifi that can
> cause this. Stanislaw has fixed them recently, but it's a fairly large
> patchset. I'm not sure, but I don't think this is really new in .36.
>
> johannes
So ... get back to you after 2.6.37?
--
MST
On wtorek, 14 wrzeĊnia 2010 o 16:28:15 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> I am running 2.6.36-rc4 on T60 with an iwlagn wireless card:
> 03:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless 5100 AGN
> [Shiloh] Network Connection
>
> I was compiling a large file which stressed the box heavily, and the
> following warning in net/mac80211/scan.c triggered:
I created a Bugzilla entry at
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18692
for your bug report, please add your address to the CC list in there, thanks!
--
Maciej Rutecki
http://www.maciek.unixy.pl
On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 17:14 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > No, it shouldn't happen. But there are various races in iwlwifi that can
> > cause this. Stanislaw has fixed them recently, but it's a fairly large
> > patchset. I'm not sure, but I don't think this is really new in .36.
> So ... get back to you after 2.6.37?
Err, yes, I guess so, though I suppose it doesn't really solve the
problem. This particular instance should be harmless though, I believe,
other than the warning.
johannes