Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 09:30:07 GMT From: Alex Kozlov <spam@rm-rf.kiev.ua> To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/149185: [rum] [panic] panic in rum(4) driver on 8.1-R Message-ID: <201008090930.o799U7KP048502@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/149185; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Alex Kozlov <spam@rm-rf.kiev.ua> To: Juergen Lock <nox@jelal.kn-bremen.de>, Bernhard Schmidt <bschmidt@techwires.net>, rpaulo@freebsd.org, Kevin Lo <kevlo@freebsd.org>, bug-followup@freebsd.org, spam@rm-rf.kiev.ua Cc: Subject: Re: kern/149185: [rum] [panic] panic in rum(4) driver on 8.1-R Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 12:23:26 +0300 On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 05:14:46PM +0200, Juergen Lock wrote: > On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 06:25:32PM +0200, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:11, Alex Kozlov <spam@rm-rf.kiev.ua> wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 10:05:39AM +0200, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > > >> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 08:52, Alex Kozlov <spam@rm-rf.kiev.ua> wrote: > > >> > On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 10:02:35PM +0200, Juergen Lock wrote: > > >> >> Regarding the 8.1 if_rum(4) panics... I got a similar one, extracted > > >> >> a dump and tried to gather some info for someone who knows the code: > > >> >> > > >> >> The zero divide fault was because (apparently) rate was unitialized, > > >> >> as is > > >> >> > > >> >> ((struct ieee80211_node *) m->M_dat.MH.MH_pkthdr.rcvif)->ni_vap->iv_txparms[0] > > >> >> > > >> >> i.e. struct ieee80211_txparam &vap->iv_txparms[0] in case it matters. > > >> > Yes, its seems that ratectl framework sometimes set ni->ni_txrate to 0 > > >> > This can be mitigated by patch [1] or by setting ucastrate option in > > >> > ifconfig. Still real issue need to be solved. > > >> > > >> The real issue is that prior to an association (RUN state) > > >> ieee80211_ratectl_node_init() is not called, therefore iv_bss is not > > >> configured in any way. > > > ieee80211_ratectl_node_init() called from iv_newstate when switching to > > > IEEE80211_S_RUN state. Most drivers do the same. Is it wrong? > > > Some call it from iv_newassoc, but this marked /* XXX move */ > > > > > >> I'll look into that if no one beats me. > > > Thanks. > > > > > > Please give attached patch a try, it should fix the issue for rum and > > all other drivers relying on the new ratectl stuff. > That seems to stop the panics, but the wifi still only works partially > (at least with hostapd), like with my original hack of a patch. One That why I use ad-hoc. Yes, seems that this panic eliminated. -- Adios
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201008090930.o799U7KP048502>