[rt2x00-users] [bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.kernel.org: [Bug 42828] rt2800pci unstable - chokes after too much I/O]
andihartmann at 01019freenet.de
Mon Oct 22 05:53:12 AEDT 2012
Francisco Pina Martins wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-10-21 at 11:02 +0200, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>> Francisco Pina Martins wrote:
>>> Here is my update on this:
>>> I cannot boot with the patched kernel - I get a kernel panic at about 9
>>> secs during boot.
>> Stanislaws patch hangs the machine for me, too. See my other post.
> Guess it's a no-go then.
It was only a test patch. He wanted to help me, but I did it manually to
get the information, too. Therefore: no problem.
>>> I have 2 more computers that connect to my routers frequently and without
>>> One has an intel 4950 wireless card (currently using kernel 3.6.2, and
>>> never had any issues);
>>> The other one also has a ralink wireless card (not sure about the model
>>> though - i can check later if it is relevant),
>> It is relevant. Which kernel version? Which driver?
> Got it:
> Wireless card (it's USB in fact, must be on an internal port): Realtek
> Semiconductor Corp. RTL8187B Wireless 802.11g 54Mbps Network Adapter
> Kernel driver: rtl8187
802.11g: I don't think this problem could be triggered by 11g as 11g
usually doesn't do aggregation.
> Kernel version: Linux Nucha-Laptop 3.2.0-31-generic #50-Ubuntu SMP Fri
> Sep 7 16:16:45 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> Turns out it's not ralink after all, but rather a realtek (I always
> confuse them)... Sorry about the confusion. Nothing like checking it out
> for sure.
No problem :-). Now it's clear.
>>> but that one is running
>>> ubuntu 12.04, which has an older kernel so I wouldn't see the bug anyway.
>> Please don't think all users would use Ubuntu :-). Please add
>> the complete kernel version!
> By no means! =-) I just wasn't sure what the kernel version in there was
> so I just wrote what I knew of the top of my head.
>> One more thing:
>> The problem usually only comes up if the connection is bad (e.g. high
>> distance or in common bad receiving conditions).
>> You wrote, that the other devices wouldn't show the behaviour you
>> described for your 2872 chipset with your AP. This doesn't prove anything.
>> Are they located at the same place or maybe at a place where the
>> receiving conditions are even worse?
>> Could you please test it with several bad receiving conditions using
>> netperf (about 30 minutes - see below) to get resilient behaviour.
> All of my wireless equipped machines are laptops, that get used in
> various different places around the house with varying signal quality.
> None of them exhibits this behaviour except my netbook (which uses
> rt2800pci). This occurs both under poor and good (1,5 - 2m of distance
> from the AP with no obstacles inbetween them) receiving conditions.
> I will attempt to test using netpref later today.
It's strange that it even happens under best receiving conditions.
The behaviour of your intel device would be interesting with your AP as
it is 802.11n capable and can do aggregation.
BTW: I'm not asking because I wouldn't believe you or so, but I want to
be sure to get enough information to estimate the situation to find a
better solution as the existing one. It's really hard as another
solution tested some time ago crashed the machine, too.
A "solution" may work with one AP, but not with another. Therefore I'm
trying to get information about your AP, too, especially because it has
the same chip as I have, which shows this "bad" behaviour.
Remember: my card used as STA doesn't show the problem regardless of
Revert-rt2x00-Don-t-let-mac80211-send-a-BAR-when-an-.patch is applied or
That's why it is interesting for me, too, how your intel device behaves
with your AP using netperf.
>>> I have applied the patch using "patch -Np1 -l -i ap.patch".
>> Where did you apply the patch? Do you use compat-wireless?
> Just the same way I applied the previous patches posted to the kernel
> bugzilla. I am using vanilla kernel, and no compat wireless (I did some
> tests with it when I first became aware of the problem, but it didn't
> work so I abandoned it - there is nothing left of it in my system).
Why didn't it work? It's much more easy to handle (from my point of
view). It should work w/o any problem!
More information about the users