Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:29:43AM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 01:07:36PM +0300, Omer Efrat wrote: >> >> The BIT macro uses unsigned long which some architectures handle as 32 bit >> >> and therefore might cause macro's shift to overflow when used on a value >> >> equals or larger than 32 (NL80211_STA_INFO_RX_DURATION and afterwards). >> >> >> >> Since 'filled' member in station_info changed to u64, BIT_ULL macro >> >> should be used with all NL80211_STA_INFO_* attribute types instead of BIT >> >> to prevent future possible bugs when one will use BIT macro for higher >> >> attributes by mistake. >> >> >> >> This commit cleans up all usages of BIT macro with the above field >> >> in cfg80211 by changing it to BIT_ULL instead. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Omer Efrat <omer.efrat@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Via which tree is this supposed to go? > > Not mine :) > > Have fun with it! Hehe :) But I don't see why this patch 5 should go either to mac80211 or wireless-drivers trees as there's no dependency or anything like that, AFAIK it's just cleanup. So it would simplest to get this patch 5 to staging tree, less conflicts that way. Patches 1 and 2 of course go to mac80211 tree and patch 4 goes to wireless-drivers. -- Kalle Valo
