Re: [PATCH 1/5] nl80211: fix validation of scheduled scan info for wowlan netdetect
On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 12:09 +, Arend van Spriel wrote: > For wowlan netdetect a separate limit is defined for the number of > matchsets. Currently, this limit is ignored and the regular limit > for scheduled scan matchsets, ie. struct wiphy::max_match_sets, is > used for the net-detect case as well. Applied. This means that brmcfmac is now broken in mac80211-next for a bit, but once it hits net-next and I merge back everything will be fine again, so just a few days (and I assume nobody us using brcmfmac from mac80211-next anyway ... wireless-testing will be fine) johannes
Re: [PATCH 1/5] nl80211: fix validation of scheduled scan info for wowlan netdetect
On 8-2-2017 10:10, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 12:09 +, Arend van Spriel wrote: >> For wowlan netdetect a separate limit is defined for the number of >> matchsets. Currently, this limit is ignored and the regular limit >> for scheduled scan matchsets, ie. struct wiphy::max_match_sets, is >> used for the net-detect case as well. > > Applied. > > This means that brmcfmac is now broken in mac80211-next for a bit, but > once it hits net-next and I merge back everything will be fine again, > so just a few days (and I assume nobody us using brcmfmac from > mac80211-next anyway ... wireless-testing will be fine) Well. Almost nobody :-p Gr. AvS
Re: [PATCH 1/5] nl80211: fix validation of scheduled scan info for wowlan netdetect
On 27-1-2017 13:31, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 12:09 +, Arend van Spriel wrote: >> For wowlan netdetect a separate limit is defined for the number of >> matchsets. Currently, this limit is ignored and the regular limit >> for scheduled scan matchsets, ie. struct wiphy::max_match_sets, is >> used for the net-detect case as well. >> > > But .. this patch shouldn't be first in the series, should it? That > leaves brcmfmac broken inbetween. > > Also, since you fix the brcmfmac value in patch 2, and it's the same in > both cases, I don't really see a dependency of anything *on* the > nl80211 patch? The brcmfmac changes can go in without it entirely, and > have no effect whatsoever, no? Patch 4 depends on patch 2. Patch 1 and 2 were a single patch, but I decided to separate them. So yeah, now patch 1 actually depends on patch 2 in order not to break brcmfmac. > IOW, I think Kalle can merge 2-5, and I can then pick up this one when > they hit net-next and I've synchronized, no? Agree. Regards, Arend
Re: [PATCH 1/5] nl80211: fix validation of scheduled scan info for wowlan netdetect
On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 13:38 +0100, Arend Van Spriel wrote: > > > IOW, I think Kalle can merge 2-5, and I can then pick up this one > > when they hit net-next and I've synchronized, no? > > Agree. Alright. I see you submitted another version, I'll assign 2-5 to Kalle, and keep 1 for myself, and not worry about the ordering since I'm the one to have to remember to actually apply it later :) johannes
Re: [PATCH 1/5] nl80211: fix validation of scheduled scan info for wowlan netdetect
On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 12:09 +, Arend van Spriel wrote: > For wowlan netdetect a separate limit is defined for the number of > matchsets. Currently, this limit is ignored and the regular limit > for scheduled scan matchsets, ie. struct wiphy::max_match_sets, is > used for the net-detect case as well. > But .. this patch shouldn't be first in the series, should it? That leaves brcmfmac broken inbetween. Also, since you fix the brcmfmac value in patch 2, and it's the same in both cases, I don't really see a dependency of anything *on* the nl80211 patch? The brcmfmac changes can go in without it entirely, and have no effect whatsoever, no? IOW, I think Kalle can merge 2-5, and I can then pick up this one when they hit net-next and I've synchronized, no? johannes
