MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALSq=BaDkVraE5hRQr4gs1RT2CHEXcn35EPzcnkN78OZcoCQfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120208172320.GA30819@redhat.com>
	<CALSq=BaDkVraE5hRQr4gs1RT2CHEXcn35EPzcnkN78OZcoCQfg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 09:19:39 +0200
Message-ID: <CANUX_P01gBqCX1XNydm=pZQMmSgUsg1D4uUx9ngeFdY8YoALDA@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20120209_081951_689639_6EC0D4DF)
Subject: Re: iwlagn: wrong command queue backtrace.
From: Emmanuel Grumbach <egrumbach@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Halperin <dhalperi@cs.washington.edu>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
	"Guy, Wey-Yi" <wey-yi.w.guy@intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ipw3945-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ilw@linux.intel.com" <ilw@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

>>
>> I just hit this with the iwlagn driver currently in Linus' tree.
>>
>
> AFAICT this could be a side effect of some bad QoS packet processing.
> The patch (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-wireless/msg84213.html)
> hasn't yet made it to Linus' tree, but you could cherry-pick it...
>

Although I would like to believe it is related, I don't think it is.
The question is how reproducible this bug is.

This badly looks like your report from around 3 months:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/25/60