Re: airo: inconsistent {hardirq-on-W} - {in-hardirq-W} usage.

2006-08-14 Thread Pekka Pietikainen
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 02:38:51PM +0300, Pekka Pietikainen wrote: Hmm... I retried with a 2.6.18rc4-based rawhide kernel and the warning is still there, previous one was rc3-git7. Could be http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdevm=115461336523555w=2 which isn't upstream yet, right? The

airo: inconsistent {hardirq-on-W} - {in-hardirq-W} usage.

2006-08-08 Thread Pekka Pietikainen
Only aironet lockdep related report I could find was http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdevm=115406279721287w=2 this looks a bit different: Linux version 2.6.17-1.2528.fc6 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 4.1.1 20060802 (Red Hat 4.1.1-14)) #1 SMP Sun Aug 6 01:43:42 EDT 2006

Re: airo: inconsistent {hardirq-on-W} - {in-hardirq-W} usage.

2006-08-08 Thread Dan Williams
On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 12:44 +0300, Pekka Pietikainen wrote: Only aironet lockdep related report I could find was http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdevm=115406279721287w=2 Shouldn't this be fixed by the wireless events patch that was a result of the orinoco lockdep issues that davej

Re: airo: inconsistent {hardirq-on-W} - {in-hardirq-W} usage.

2006-08-08 Thread Pekka Pietikainen
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:16:13PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: Pekka Pietikainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Only aironet lockdep related report I could find was http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdevm=115406279721287w=2 this looks a bit different: Linux version 2.6.17-1.2528.fc6

Re: airo: inconsistent {hardirq-on-W} - {in-hardirq-W} usage.

2006-08-08 Thread Herbert Xu
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 02:38:51PM +0300, Pekka Pietikainen wrote: Hmm... I retried with a 2.6.18rc4-based rawhide kernel and the warning is still there, previous one was rc3-git7. Are you sure it's the same warning? The one you quoted earlier is caused by the lock validator mixing up spin

Re: airo: inconsistent {hardirq-on-W} - {in-hardirq-W} usage.

2006-08-08 Thread John W. Linville
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 10:52:22PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 02:38:51PM +0300, Pekka Pietikainen wrote: Could be http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdevm=115461336523555w=2 which isn't upstream yet, right? That's a separate bug fix which should produce an