On 2010-09-10 3:49 PM, Ben Greear wrote: > On 09/10/2010 03:44 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> On 2010-09-10 3:04 PM, greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> From: Ben Greear<greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> When adding an STA, the old code checked if there was already >>> an STA with the same BSS. Instead, check to see if there is >>> exactly the same STA in order to allow multiple STA to be >>> associated with the same AP. >> I think that's misleading. sta_info_get_bss does not check if there is a >> STA with the same BSS. Like sta_info_get it looks for a STA with the >> given address, but unlike sta_info_get, it also accepts it if it's on a >> different interface than the provided sdata, but part of the same BSS as >> the sdata's. >> Because of that, this change seems bogus to me. > > W/out this change, I cannot get a second STA to associate with > the AP because that code returns EBUSY, because the > first STA and second STA point to the same bss. > > There could be a better way to do what I'm trying to do, > but that one-line patch made it work for me. I'll be happy > to try alternative suggestions. This patch will most likely break other stuff. the sta_info_get -> sta_info_get_bss change was added for a reason. I can look into it later to see what the reason was, but I don't think your change can go in without further review. - Felix -- 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
