Return-path: Received: from mail-pg0-f53.google.com ([74.125.83.53]:35078 "EHLO mail-pg0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934275AbdA0L0D (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jan 2017 06:26:03 -0500 Received: by mail-pg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id 194so80735483pgd.2 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 03:25:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] nl80211: fix validation of scheduled scan info for wowlan netdetect To: Johannes Berg , Luca Coelho References: <1484820088-24448-1-git-send-email-arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> <1484827206.2774.12.camel@coelho.fi> <1485248251.7244.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> <13d1e654-6928-39e7-4751-fb90d3da7a54@broadcom.com> Cc: linux-wireless From: Arend Van Spriel Message-ID: (sfid-20170127_122611_840865_CC39877A) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 12:25:18 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <13d1e654-6928-39e7-4751-fb90d3da7a54@broadcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 24-1-2017 12:28, Arend Van Spriel wrote: > On 24-1-2017 9:57, Johannes Berg wrote: >> On Thu, 2017-01-19 at 14:08 +0100, Arend Van Spriel wrote: >>> >>> On 19-1-2017 13:00, Luca Coelho wrote: >>>> On Thu, 2017-01-19 at 10:01 +0000, Arend van Spriel wrote: >>>>> For wowlan netdetect a separate limit is defined for the number >>>>> of >>>>> matchsets. Currently, this limit is ignored and the regular limit >>>>> for scheduled scan matchsets, ie. struct wiphy::max_match_sets, >>>>> is >>>>> used for the net-detect case as well. >>>>> >>>>> Cc: Luciano Coelho >>>>> Signed-off-by: Arend van Spriel >>>>> --- >>>> >>>> What?! You don't have the same number of matchsets for both? :P >>> >>> Actually I have, but your comment mentioned they do not have to be >>> the >>> same. brcmfmac actually did not set max_nd_match_sets so I was >>> surprised >>> it worked. That said this patch will result in regression in brcmfmac >>> :-p Not sure about other drivers supporting net-detect. >> >> So do you want to submit a patch to brcmfmac first, and then I'll apply >> this later? I can apply it and break it, but now that we already know >> ...? > > I have a brcmfmac patch in the queue. I will look at the other scheduled > scan supporting drivers. Hi Johannes, I actually have two dependent brcmfmac patches. Do you expect conflict if Kalle takes all? Regards, Arend