Return-path: Received: from mk-filter-2-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com ([212.74.100.53]:10730 "EHLO mk-filter-2-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753488AbZIXSO1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:14:27 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:14:25 +0100 (BST) From: Hugh Dickins To: Johannes Berg cc: "John W. Linville" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.31-git wireless broken In-Reply-To: <1253813740.3868.324.camel@johannes.local> Message-ID: References: <1253813740.3868.324.camel@johannes.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Many thanks for your rapid response. On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2009-09-24 at 18:18 +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > > I expect you'll need a lot more info from me: please do ask > > (but bear in mind that I'm wireless and network ignorant). > > Thanks. I'm not sure why you'd get the warning there every few seconds, > but I suppose we don't really care all that much. > > I think you're probably running afoul of a bugfix that I did while at > the wireless summit, and then the fix to it made it in, but not yet the > fix to the fix :( > > Are you using an encrypted network, or an open one? I've been working under the belief that it's WPA encrypted. > If it's open, can you try this patch? But I could try the patch, in case I've been fooled. > http://johannes.sipsolutions.net/patches/kernel/all/2009-09-24-17%3a32/010-cfg80211-fix-wpas-open.patch However, all the trees I'm working with (Linus latest, or the bisect result, or a week old mmotm) have cfg80211_mgd_wext_connect saying: if (!netif_running(wdev->netdev)) return 0; wdev->wext.connect.ie = wdev->wext.ie; wdev->wext.connect.ie_len = wdev->wext.ie_len; wdev->wext.connect.privacy = wdev->wext.default_key != -1; if (wdev->wext.keys) { wdev->wext.keys->def = wdev->wext.default_key; wdev->wext.keys->defmgmt = wdev->wext.default_mgmt_key; } if (!wdev->wext.connect.ssid_len) return 0; which is not consistent with the fix your patch is making. But I do believe I'm encrypted anyway. Hugh