> Now at least it's _trying_ to get the stats :) Yeah, but it shouldn't. You can test the mesh capability of the hardware (explizitly or implicitly via priv->mesh_dev != NULL) and you should only issue mesh commands if the hardware can do it. > You were getting that anyway. Right :-) > > That ethtool returns junk like "9223372036854775808" is > > another error. lbs_mesh_access() returned 2, and the code > > does "if (ret) return ret". Maybe it should be like "if > > (ret) return -ENOSYS (or some other ENOxxx) instead? > > The code does 'if (ret) return;', because it has no option to > return an error. I wrote "if (ret) return ret", not "if (ret) return;". Anyway I think that returning something positive in the error case here seems wrong. However, I'm only thinking this, I haven't checked the ethtool interface/documentation of the kernel. I applied your second patch on top of the first one and now this happens: $ ethtool -S eth1 ethtool -S eth1 Which seems much better. The ultimate patch would be to provide the result of CMD_802_GET_LOG for ethX and the result from CMD_ACT_MESH_GET_STATS for mshX devices. So, if you combine both patches into one, I'd ACK from the "firmware without mesh capabilities" perspective :-) -- 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
