[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Issue with kernel 5.10.0-9-*?



On Sat 30 Oct 2021 at 15:30:53 (+0200), Hans wrote:
> Am Montag, 11. Oktober 2021, 10:59:39 CEST schrieb Hans:
> So I am answering myself. 
> 
> Yesterday I got a new display and could reanimate my notebook. Thus I did some 
> testing, and yes, the issue with 5.10.0-9-* is still existent. Going back to 
> 0-8- let this issue disappear.
> 
> But I got new informations: The kernel module which is responsible for that, 
> is ath5k.ko (This is an Atheros card). Normally the wireless LED only blinks, 
> when there is real traffic aimed to my IP. However, with 0-9- the LED is 
> permanently blinking. 
> 
> I could verify, that it is no traffic created by the notebook itself (used 
> tcpdump) and killed all network processes (daemons/apps whatever) running on 
> the system.
> 
> But even when there were no processes running except the one needed for the 
> connection with the router, the LED kept on blinking.
> 
> Further investigation showed, that the blinking appeared due to the broadcast 
> packages sent by the router. The wireless card thinks, this is normal traffic 
> and the LED blinks.
> 
> This is bad for me, as the LED was in the past often a good sign, when 
> soemthing fishy is going on. If the LED is only blinking from time to time, 
> everything is ok, but when it was blinking som,ething special is going on 
> (i.e. an update is running or freshclam is updating, but also some brute force 
> attacks could also be discovered.) 
> 
> So, I would like the old behaviour back! Maybe this could be reverted? Should 
> I file a bugreport? Or maybe is this already known? 
> 
> Maybe someone could confirm this, too, or might have been not noticed yet, and 
> could have an eye on his system. Would be nice, before I file a bugreport. 
> 
> I also saw, there is kernel-5.14*-bpo* (I believe bpo stands for 
> "backported"?), did not test this kernel, but if 5.14 will become stable, this 
> issue might be already fixed in this version. Dunno....
> 
> Thank you very much for reading this and any hints.

Is this the same problem that you reported at:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/06/msg00698.html
What did you discover back then?

Cheers,
David.


Reply to: