Return-path: Received: from smtp.rutgers.edu ([128.6.72.243]:51946 "EHLO annwn13.rutgers.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757232AbXJLVCc (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 17:02:32 -0400 From: Michael Wu To: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtl8187: remove NICMAC setting in configure_filters callback Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 16:59:54 -0400 Cc: John Linville , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <20071012204512.13393.84281.stgit@magic.sourmilk.net> <1192222423.4770.84.camel@johannes.berg> In-Reply-To: <1192222423.4770.84.camel@johannes.berg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart70135652.auGDIGW0ZU"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Message-Id: <200710121659.58374.flamingice@sourmilk.net> (sfid-20071012_220237_665411_2286910D) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --nextPart70135652.auGDIGW0ZU Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 12 October 2007 16:53, Johannes Berg wrote: > Does this mean you're always operating promiscuously, or was this a bug? Just a bug. > If the latter, do you not support promisc at all? Or should the FIF flag > always be set? I think it can be done by a different bit, but I need to check. -Michael Wu --nextPart70135652.auGDIGW0ZU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD4DBQBHD+BOT3Oqt9AH4aERAkEdAJjAdQklUKCLpqxLXV1YwLXYw/apAKCaxFkc rzK7JAY+bMR7N+V0ceBA0A== =0qbs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart70135652.auGDIGW0ZU--