Hi Mohammed, > > No, initialization was incorrect -- this is better: > > http://p.sipsolutions.net/e5ab0f3e38f90d6d.txt > > > > thanks a lot for the patch! > with the above patch ath9k seems be working fine with the single > incompatible adhoc interface. Ok, cool. > but i was just experimenting with ath9k(similar to iwlwifi having > hw->wiphy->n_iface_combinations > 1) with this patch. > > static const struct ieee80211_iface_limit a[] = { > { .max = 2, .types = BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION) }, > }; > > static const struct ieee80211_iface_limit b[] = { > { .max = 2, .types = BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_MESH_POINT) }, > }; > > static const struct ieee80211_iface_combination if_comb[] = { > {.limits = a, > .n_limits = ARRAY_SIZE(a), > .max_interfaces = 2, > .num_different_channels = 1, > }, > {.limits = b, > .n_limits = ARRAY_SIZE(b), > .max_interfaces = 2, > .num_different_channels = 1, > }, > > }; > > i could not add mesh interface if a managed interface is already there > and vice versa. if this is the expected behavior, then fine. No, that's not expected! Another bug! We should write some unit tests for this code I guess :-) > iteration 1: cfg80211_can_change_interface all_iftypes 4 and used_iftypes 84 > iteration 2: cfg80211_can_change_interface all_iftypes 80 and used_iftypes 84 Curious. Why did it accept it then? Where did you place the printk? I'm handling Linus's problem right now, so it'll be a bit until I can look at this in more detail again. johannes -- 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
