On 20.08.2018 12:27, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 09:37:05AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx>
Pointer arithmetic already adjusts by the size of the struct,
so the sizeof() calculation is wrong. This is basically the
same as Colin King's patch for similar code in the iwlwifi
driver.
Fixes: 230ebaa189af ("cfg80211: read wmm rules from regulatory database")
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx>
---
net/wireless/reg.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/wireless/reg.c b/net/wireless/reg.c
index 4fc66a117b7d..283902974fbf 100644
--- a/net/wireless/reg.c
+++ b/net/wireless/reg.c
@@ -452,8 +452,7 @@ reg_copy_regd(const struct ieee80211_regdomain *src_regd)
continue;
regd->reg_rules[i].wmm_rule = d_wmm +
- (src_regd->reg_rules[i].wmm_rule - s_wmm) /
- sizeof(struct ieee80211_wmm_rule);
+ (src_regd->reg_rules[i].wmm_rule - s_wmm);
}
return regd;
}
As side note those pointer aritmetics related with rule->wmm_rule is
really involuted in various places in reg.c . Seems would be better to
just make wmm_rule part of iee80211_reg_rule structure like this:
struct ieee80211_reg_rule {
struct ieee80211_freq_range freq_range;
struct ieee80211_power_rule power_rule;
struct ieee80211_wmm_rule wmm_rule;
u32 flags;
u32 dfs_cac_ms;
};
and use a flag to intdicate wmm_rule is valid. There should be no
big memory overhead sice there are only few reg_rules for the regdomain.
Or I'm wrong?
Regards
Stanislaw
Thank you for the patch.
I've applied the patch, but it does not seem to help.
Spawning second instance of hostapd causes same error as before.
I don't follow why this issue would not occur with single NIC.
It's not like I am an expert in this field, but those rules should be
applied to both interfaces, right?
Both interfaces use ath10k, that should imply same code path for setting
rules.
