On 19.04.2017 18:46, Perry Hooker wrote: > > Understood. I'm still open to the possibility that I've made a mistake > - I don't want to re-submit the patch if my analysis is incorrect. > > Maybe I didn't make it clear (my apologies if so) - what I'm really > looking for here is help confirming or refuting my work. If > re-submitting the patch is the best way to do this, then I can > certainly go that route. > Before you do this you should double check that the raised objections are indeed not justified. I have not looked too deep into the code but in function WILC_WFI_p2p_rx() the buffer is conditionally passed to cfg80211_rx_mgmt() which handles the passed data as being little endian. To me this is a strong indication that the data in the buffer is also little endian (which is what Dan pointed out and why the change you propose is not correct). Regards, Lino _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
