From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:39798 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754012AbZEIW3u (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 May 2009 18:29:50 -0400 Subject: Re: IPV6 testing... Re: [PATCH] ath9k: Fix FIF_BCN_PRBRESP_PROMISC handling From: David Woodhouse To: David Miller Cc: lrodriguez@atheros.com, stable@kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20090509.122936.242607926.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20090506000410.GC3436@tesla> <1241858970.2910.63.camel@macbook.infradead.org> <20090509.122936.242607926.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 09 May 2009 23:29:40 +0100 Message-Id: <1241908180.24436.32.camel@macbook.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 12:29 -0700, David Miller wrote: > I pretty much never test IPV6 and I'm not embarassed. Really, I > simply do not use it and have no interest in IPV6 at all. It's simply > not on my radar. I'll work on ipv6 bugs, but as far as using it > actively and testing every driver I write with it, NO WAY. I wasn't suggesting that you should care about IPv6, per se. I was suggesting that you should care about Ethernet multicast. And the simplest way of testing that seems to be to use IPv6. -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@intel.com Intel Corporation