Return-path: Received: from mail-vx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]:56920 "EHLO mail-vx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753591Ab1KZVy5 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Nov 2011 16:54:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201111262232.46195.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <201111250203.29786.rjw@sisk.pl> <201111262232.46195.rjw@sisk.pl> Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 05:54:56 +0800 Message-ID: (sfid-20111126_225521_709221_FC30135E) Subject: Re: [Regression, 3.2-rc1] ath9k broken on AR928X (was: Re: Linux 3.2-rc3 - just in time for Thanksgiving) From: Adrian Chadd To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Senthil Balasubramanian , "John W. Linville" , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Wireless , "Luis R. Rodriguez" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 27 November 2011 05:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> Tomorrow I'll try to identify the offending commits. > > Well, it took more time than I had hoped. :-( > > Bisection turns up: > > commit 2577c6e8f2320f1d2f09be122efef5b9118efee4 > Author: Senthil Balasubramanian > Date: ? Tue Sep 13 22:38:18 2011 +0530 > > ? ?ath9k_hw: Add support for AR946/8x chipsets. > > ? ?This patch adds support for AR946/8x chipets. Oh god. That's going to be fun to figure out :) > which I think is wrong for at lest two reasons. ?Not that I understand > what it actually does to the driver, but first, it does much more than the > changelog says and, second, it is practically impossible to revert > because of the number of commits on top depending on it. ?Quite frankly, > it is about to make it to my list of examples of how things should _not_ be > done in the kernel. > > The commit immediately preceding it doesn't show any symptoms of failure, so > I'm quite convinced this one really introduced the problem for me. > > The chip in the affected box is (according to "lspci -v"): Can you please find out what the actual PCI device id is? That way I can help you (hopefully) isolate which bits of that change would cause your regression. That commit almost exclusively touches the AR93xx chipset support, so I can't (easily) see how this would break support for the AR928x NICs. Adrian