Jan Kiszka wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Jiri Benc wrote: >>> On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 19:10:01 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> BUG: warning at >>>> /usr/src/rt2x00/rt2x00/ieee80211/ieee80211.c:1256/ieee80211_tx() >>>> <cfa02245> ieee80211_master_start_xmit+0x105/0x430 [80211] <c024e35d> >>>> __ip_ct_refresh_acct+0x4d/0x60 >>>> <c024fd11> tcp_packet+0x941/0x970 <c0217442> qdisc_restart+0x92/0x100 >>>> <c020d43d> dev_queue_xmit+0xbd/0x1a0 <cfa050d8> >>>> ieee80211_subif_start_xmit+0x468/0x480 [80211] >>>> <c0207dca> skb_clone+0x3a/0x1a0 <c021d16d> nf_hook_slow+0x4d/0xc0 >>>> <c020d495> dev_queue_xmit+0x115/0x1a0 <c0226a63> ip_output+0x1c3/0x200 >>>> <c0225740> ip_finish_output+0x0/0x180 <c022628b> >>>> ip_queue_xmit+0x36b/0x3b0 >>>> <c0224130> dst_output+0x0/0x10 <ce9bae7d> usb_hcd_giveback_urb+0x2d/0x60 >>>> [usbcore] >>>> <c0237da2> tcp_v4_send_check+0x82/0xd0 <c0237da2> >>>> tcp_v4_send_check+0x82/0xd0 >>>> <c0233244> tcp_transmit_skb+0x5e4/0x610 <c0234b36> >>>> __tcp_push_pending_frames+0x676/0x740 >>>> <c0207f81> __alloc_skb+0x51/0x100 <c022b817> tcp_sendmsg+0x897/0x980 >>>> <c0153fa9> core_sys_select+0x1b9/0x2b0 <c0241f1d> inet_sendmsg+0x3d/0x50 >>>> <c0202a8f> do_sock_write+0x8f/0xa0 <c020301f> sock_aio_write+0x5f/0x70 >>>> <c01443d3> do_sync_write+0xc3/0x100 <c01247f0> >>>> autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40 >>>> <c0144ca1> vfs_write+0xa1/0x140 <c01451d3> sys_write+0x43/0x70 >>>> <c0102ae7> syscall_call+0x7/0xb >>>> >>>> Does it tell you anything already? Is there something I may instrument? >>>> What >>>> could the driver do wrong to trigger such bug? >>> Do you have CONFIG_NET_SCHED enabled? >>> > > Sorry, this was most probably false alarm for the official stack. The > problem now appears to be related to a patch against d80211 that is only > present in the rt2x00 CVS.
Well, I said "most probably"... The actual problem was meanwhile identified: shorewall happened to overwrite the queueing discipline of wmaster0 with pfifo_fast. I found the magic knob to tell shorewall to no longer do this (at least until I want to manage traffic control that way...), but I still wonder if it is an acceptable situation. Currently, the user can intentionally or accidentally screw up the stack this way. Jan PS: Tests performed on a 2.6.17 kernel, but I don't see a reason why newer kernels should be immune.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
