From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from 128-177-27-249.ip.openhosting.com ([128.177.27.249]:58020 "EHLO jmalinen.user.openhosting.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751890AbZIZTJV (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Sep 2009 15:09:21 -0400 Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 22:09:21 +0300 From: Jouni Malinen To: ASIC Felix Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Is this normal: ath9k: Two wiphys trying to scan at the same time Message-ID: <20090926190921.GA22838@jm.kir.nu> References: <1253825462.19221.14.camel@darkslate> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1253825462.19221.14.camel@darkslate> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 01:51:02PM -0700, ASIC Felix wrote: > is this normal: > > ath9k: Two wiphys trying to scan at the same time > > afaik, I did not enable virtual phy stuff. Connection appears to be > working okay. I've been seeing this for quite some time. That should only be showing up if virtual wiphys are used. In this case, it should not really be showing up and is likely indicating a bug somewhere (ath9k or mac80211). I don't know how to reproduce this easily, so I have not looked into more details yet. It would be interesting to add printk calls into ath9k_sw_scan_start() and ath9k_sw_scan_complete() just after the mutex_lock() call to figure out whether mac80211 ends up calling sw_scan_start() driver handler twice in a row which would be one possible way to get this triggered. The other way to hit this would be if ath9k were to somehow not update aphy->state correctly when the scan has been completed. -- Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA