Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> writes: > On 11/7/22 14:54, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> writes: >> >>>> BTW did you test this on a real device? >>> >>> Yes, SDIO RS9116 on next-20221104 and 5.10.153 . >> >> Very good, thanks. >> >>> What prompts this question ? >> >> I get too much "fixes" which have been nowhere near real hardware and >> can break the driver instead of fixing anything, especially syzbot >> patches have been notorious. So I have become cautious. > > Ah, this is a real problem right here. > > wpa-supplicant 2.9 from OE dunfell 3.1 works. > wpa-supplicant 2.10 from OE kirkstone 4.0 fails. > > That's how I ran into this initially. My subsequent tests were with > debian wpa-supplicant 2.9 and 2.10 packages, since that was easier, > they (2.10 does, 2.9 does not) trigger the problem all the same. > > I'm afraid this RSI driver is so poorly maintained and has so many > bugs, that, there is little that can make it worse. The dealing I had > with RSI has been ... long ... and very depressing. I tried to get > documentation or anything which would help us fix the problems we have > with this RSI driver ourselves, but RSI refused it all and suggested > we instead use their downstream driver (I won't go into the quality of > that). It seems RSI has little interest in maintaining the upstream > driver, pity. > > I've been tempted to flag this driver as BROKEN for a while, to > prevent others from suffering with it. That's a pity indeed. Should we at least mark the driver as orphaned in MAINTAINERS? Or even better if you Marek would be willing to step up as the maintainer? :) > Until I send such a patch, you can expect real fixes coming from my > end at least. Great, thank you. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
