Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:56251 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753825Ab0JDRWi (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Oct 2010 13:22:38 -0400 Received: from [192.168.100.195] (firewall.candelatech.com [70.89.124.249]) (authenticated bits=0) by ns3.lanforge.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o94HMcO5032403 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 4 Oct 2010 10:22:38 -0700 Message-ID: <4CAA0D5E.2090700@candelatech.com> Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2010 10:22:38 -0700 From: Ben Greear MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Putting APs into bridges? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: I got a bug report from someone using my ath5k VAP patch. It seems he put two VAPs into a bridge device, and got an assert here (nevermind the printk, I just added that to help debug the issue). static void __ieee80211_wake_queue(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, int queue, enum queue_stop_reason reason) { struct ieee80211_local *local = hw_to_local(hw); struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata; trace_wake_queue(local, queue, reason); if (WARN_ON(queue >= hw->queues)) { printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: queue: %i hw->queues: %i\n", sdata->name, queue, hw->queues); return; } Before I try to reproduce this, it is valid to add APs to bridge devices in the first place? Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com