Return-path: Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.158]:19182 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755193AbZAPWGt (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:06:49 -0500 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 19so915571fgg.17 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:06:46 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3ace41890901161406r591eb519o44b41efa3d36295c@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20090116_230653_270339_2DEB2D5C) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:06:46 +0000 From: "Hin-Tak Leung" To: "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: garbaged AP mac address in dmesg in wireless-testing? Cc: "Hauke Mehrtens" , "Kalle Valo" , linux-wireless In-Reply-To: <20090116192046.GD10037@tuxdriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <3ace41890901160907w2d04da91r61744477ac64e018@mail.gmail.com> <20090116183826.GC10037@tuxdriver.com> <87ocy7xejp.fsf@litku.valot.fi> <4970DC58.3000507@hauke-m.de> <20090116192046.GD10037@tuxdriver.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 7:20 PM, John W. Linville wrote: > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 08:13:28PM +0100, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: >> Kalle Valo wrote: >> > "John W. Linville" writes: >> > >> >> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 05:07:50PM +0000, Hin-Tak Leung wrote: >> >>> Since a few days ago, my dmesg is looking like this - instead of the >> >>> older AA:BB:CC:DD:EE:FF form >> >>> with the mac address of the AP. >> >>> That ffff88* looks like a pointer/address to me? Is this change intentional? >> >>> >> >>> -------------- >> >>> wlan2 direct probe responded >> >>> wlan2: authenticate with AP ffff880070995aa0 >> >>> wlan2: authenticated >> >>> wlan2: associate with AP ffff880070995aa0 >> >>> wlan2: RX ReassocResp from ffff88001431f01a (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) >> >>> wlan2: associated >> > >> > Works for me: >> > >> > [37125.111672] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:12:17:e7:98:de >> > [37125.113509] wlan0: authenticated >> > [37125.113514] wlan0: associate with AP 00:12:17:e7:98:de >> > [37125.115875] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:12:17:e7:98:de (capab=0x11 status=0 aid=1) >> > [37125.115881] wlan0: associated >> > >> > This is on x86 32bit with iwl3945 and latest wireless-testing. >> > >> >> Odd...some problem with the "%pM" printk conversion? What kernel >> >> are you running? >> > >> > And on what architecture? >> > >> >> I have got the same problem on x86_64 with rtl8187, kernel 2.6.27 and >> compat-wireless-2008-01-16. >> >> [ 3064.480766] wlan0: authenticate with AP ffff8801291dfa20 >> [ 3064.482271] wlan0: authenticated >> [ 3064.482275] wlan0: associate with AP ffff8801291dfa20 >> [ 3064.485021] wlan0: RX AssocResp from ffff88011128c01a (capab=0x411 >> status=0 aid=1) >> [ 3064.485025] wlan0: associated > > compat-wireless users are probably using kernels that have printk > implementations that do not understand "%pM". QED. :-) > > -- > John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you > linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready. > 2.6.28.1-9.rc2.fc10.x86_64 and yes, I am using compat-wireless ... what puzzles me is that the as-shipped modules have the mac addresses correctly. Okay, sorry for the noise. I did look at git blame and, when I saw the date of the lines with the %pM commits was two months ago, I didn't bother to look further, since the problem is very recent... I was looking in the right direction but just didn't look far enough. commit 0c68ae2605dbcf67414d8d1f19af93be44b355fb Author: Johannes Berg Date: Mon Oct 27 15:56:10 2008 -0700 mac80211: convert to %pM away from print_mac Also remove a few stray DECLARE_MAC_BUF that were no longer used at all. Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg Signed-off-by: David S. Miller -------------------------------- commit dd45c9cf687682c9ce256ab14bd8914db77410bb Author: Harvey Harrison Date: Mon Oct 27 15:47:12 2008 -0700 printk: add %pM format specifier for MAC addresses -------------- and it is in lib/vsprintf.c ... But I guess ideally compat-wireless should patch this in to somewhere under net/mac80211? (that's the whole point of compat-wireless, to run with older kernels?)