Return-path: Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([144.76.43.152]:43555 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753279Ab3LCOZf (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Dec 2013 09:25:35 -0500 Message-ID: <1386080727.4393.30.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20131203_152538_768749_38F69351) Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfg80211: fix WARN_ON for re-association to the expired BSS From: Johannes Berg To: Ujjal Roy Cc: "John W. Linville" , Kernel Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 15:25:27 +0100 In-Reply-To: (sfid-20131202_061920_049364_60F7EF5B) References: <1385883096-7143-1-git-send-email-royujjal@gmail.com> <1385890375.4171.0.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20131202_061920_049364_60F7EF5B) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 10:49 +0530, Ujjal Roy wrote: > So, can you please tell me what type of bugs or what bugs the cfg80211 > going to catch? As I see cfg80211 allows re-assoc command and the > driver is able to get a BSS using the function cfg80211_get_bss(). So, > the driver is going to re-associate and the result is a Kernel warning. > At this point driver's internal association is successful though. Yeah, I think you're right - I was confusing this with some Broadcom thing (the joys of everyone using gmail ...) Why would you ever reassoc to the exact same BSS? But anyway ... I'll take a closer look at your patch/the code. johannes