Return-path: Received: from mail-ey0-f174.google.com ([209.85.215.174]:37099 "EHLO mail-ey0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751122Ab2H0GqG (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2012 02:46:06 -0400 Received: by eaac11 with SMTP id c11so1075807eaa.19 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 23:46:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20120827064248.GA22073@ritirata.org> References: <1346014505-7554-1-git-send-email-ordex@autistici.org> <1346014505-7554-2-git-send-email-ordex@autistici.org> <1346045881.3746.0.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <20120827064248.GA22073@ritirata.org> From: Julian Calaby Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 16:45:44 +1000 Message-ID: (sfid-20120827_084610_475356_05B87476) Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] ath9k_htc: advertise allowed VIFs combination To: Antonio Quartulli Cc: Johannes Berg , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Sujith Manoharan , ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Antonio, On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Antonio Quartulli wrote: > On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 03:41:09 +1000, Julian Calaby wrote: >> Hi Johannes, >> >> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Johannes Berg >> wrote: >> > On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 09:48 +1000, Julian Calaby wrote: >> >> Antonio, >> >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 6:55 AM, Antonio Quartulli wrote: >> >> > This driver now advertises its allowed VIFs combinations to the mac80211 >> >> > sublayer. >> >> > >> >> > Other than that, practical tests shown that ath9k_htc devices allow an IBSS VIF >> >> > to coexist with VIF set up on other modes. This patch removes the check which >> >> > block the creation of any other VIF whenever an IBSS one is already present. >> >> >> >> These two patches should really be applied in the opposite order: >> >> >> >> You should add the interface combination data (this patch) then remove >> >> the old checking code. >> >> >> >> This way there's not a window (admittedly only one patch) where the >> >> interface combinations aren't enforced. >> > >> > FWIW, it's the other way around, in that window no combinations would be >> > permitted at all... >> >> It's still a problem for bisection then =) > > Shall I merge the two patches and do both the changes in one shot? You might as well, however you should address Mohammed's comment first. Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ .Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/