On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Pavel Roskin <proski@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:27 -0500, Bob Copeland wrote: > >> Actually, I remembered in the dark recesses of my moldering brain >> that someone had a lost patch for this a while ago, so I searched >> the archives. Pavel, ok to add your s-o-b? > > Since my patch was dropped and the new patch was implemented without my > participation, it makes no sense to put my s-o-b on the code I didn't > write (even though I wrote something similar before). Ok, I just wanted to be sure to maintain proper credit, the "From" should suffice. I did rewrite the patch but it actually had an identical diff. FWIW, the thread didn't give a clue why it didn't make it upstream, just missed I guess (http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=122480002519627&w=2, ultimately that problem was fixed by correctly setting the rs_more flag). Anyway, the patch, while IMO correct, will still result in mac80211 warning in ieee80211_rx with -1 just as 255 will; it just fixes the subsequent out of bound read. If we want to tell mac80211 a real rate, I think we should change it to s8 then hw_to_driver_rix should do something like: idx = array[x][y]; if (WARN_ON(idx < 0)) idx = 0; return idx; Then we get the warning in the driver and we also return a real rate up the stack. I'll prep a patch for this unless there are any objections. -- Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com -- 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
