From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755041Ab2AIH5K (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2012 02:57:10 -0500 Received: from mail-vx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]:65194 "EHLO mail-vx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754874Ab2AIH5I convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2012 02:57:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 13:27:07 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ath9k crash 3.2-rc7 From: Mohammed Shafi To: MR Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Rajkumar Manoharan Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2012/1/9 MR : >  >> So, I am building 3.2 with two patches: over/under-flow catcher (pity >  >that >  >> it seems to be on a multiple-times-per-second codepath and just leaving >  >the >  > > checks there for everyone is suboptimal) and allegedely proper fix. Both >  > > applied OK with a small offset. >  > >  > as per our assumption, we should not see those over/underflow errors, >  > with the patch >  > above mentioned. please let us know if you hit upon this warnings, >  > even after the proper fix. > > In my experience (and as I understand the situation) if garbage is writen to > the "chan", it is caught by the check and device is dead-until-reboot anyway. > On 3.0, even without checks device was dead-until-reboot, but no crash > happened. All these checks do is converting "panic" to "WiFi broken" for 3.2. > true those checks are to confirm that 'chan' is corrupted and the patch is to fix it. -- shafi