Return-path: Received: from extu-mxob-1.symantec.com ([216.10.194.28]:49554 "EHLO extu-mxob-1.symantec.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753917AbZAHQTE (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2009 11:19:04 -0500 Received: from [172.20.18.193]([172.20.18.193]) (2711 bytes) by megami.veritas.com via sendmail with P:esmtp/R:smart_host/T:smtp (sender: ) id for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 08:18:46 -0800 (PST) (Smail-3.2.0.101 1997-Dec-17 #15 built 2001-Aug-30) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 16:18:56 +0000 (GMT) From: Hugh Dickins To: Maxim Levitsky cc: Jiri Slaby , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath5k-devel@venema.h4ckr.net Subject: Re: [ath5k-devel] ath5k_tasklet_rx BUG_ON(bf->skb == NULL) In-Reply-To: <1231426017.922.2.camel@maxim-laptop> Message-ID: (sfid-20090108_171913_772522_442B328D) References: <1231426017.922.2.camel@maxim-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:49 +0000, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > > When running swapping load tests, wireless alive but not in active use, > > I've now twice hit the BUG_ON(bf->skb == NULL) in ath5k_tasklet_rx(). > > > > So, that BUG_ON(bf->skb == NULL) appears to be unsafe under > > memory pressure; but the fix wasn't obvious to me, so over > > to you! > > > > I'd be glad to try patches, of course, but it's not happening > > often enough for me to report back success quickly - unless I > > stumble on a quicker way to reproduce it, it'll need a week or > > two to grow confident of a fix. > > I use aspire one, and I don't see that, did this happen several times? A couple of times, when running memory swapping loads: I doubt it would be any problem when there's easily freeable memory around. > > Could you try compat-wireless: > > http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Download Thanks, I've downloaded the tarball, but the difference between the drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c in there and in Linus's git is very little: I'd be be very surprised if it fixes this bug. As I said, it'll take a week or two to be confident that the issue has been fixed, so I'd rather embark on that once a likely fix has gone in. (Of course, just removing the BUG_ON, and making sure there's no oops on the NULL pointer, would fix my immediate issue: but I doubt the right fix will be as simple as that.) > > It has many fixes that made my wireless on that notebook more or less > usable. I find 2.6.28's wireless very usable on that machine: I bet you're a wireless specialist who stresses the wireless side of things in ways I wouldn't begin to imagine: whereas I just browse and download and scp a little, but as a memory specialist try swapping loads which perhaps that driver had not been subjected to before. Hugh