On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 18:26 +0200, Karl Beldan wrote: > > Then again, maybe you can make a bit more verbose commit log, and check > > what broke it? > > > After a glimpse before leaving FWIU : > > - 6829c878 Jul 2009 - "cfg80211: emulate connect with auth/assoc" > original code for 'cmd' > ieee80211_build_preq_ies takes supported rates from sband->bitrates[]. > - 8dcb2003 Aug 2010 - "mac80211: Filter ProbeReq SuppRates based on TX > rate mask" > ieee80211_build_preq_ies takes a rate mask, hw_scan uses -1/sw_scan uses > sdata->rc_rateidx_mask. > - 34850ab2 Jul 2011 - "cfg80211: allow userspace to control supported > rates in scan" add a "bitmap of rates to advertise" in the scan request. > - 85a237fe Jul 2011 - "mac80211: implement scan supported rates" > take the rate mask from 'cmd' > - 3965ac00 Sep 2011 - "wireless: Fix rate mask for scan request" > fix rate mask when 'cmd' has params.channel > > > .. and rate mask remains unset when 'cmd' has params.channel > So I guess it started showing after 85a237fe, but the original cmd never > filled a rate mask which started existing only after 34850ab .. Heh, so I guess this goes way back ... what does it actually affect really though? only connections with iw, which should really not be done that much? potentially wpa_s with wext, though I'm not even sure that works? Either way - is it worth for 3.18/stable? johannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
