From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48665 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753280Ab2GILy3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jul 2012 07:54:29 -0400 Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 13:54:24 +0200 From: Stanislaw Gruszka To: Johannes Berg Cc: Intel Linux Wireless , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RHEL6 PATCH] iwlwifi: remove spurious warning Message-ID: <20120709115423.GE2438@redhat.com> (sfid-20120709_135435_432922_AAEDDD56) References: <1341834509-11601-1-git-send-email-sgruszka@redhat.com> <1341834647.4455.32.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1341834647.4455.32.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 01:50:47PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 13:48 +0200, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > > BZ#837754 > > > > Description: > > Some devices do not set SEQ_RX_FRAME flags for few commands that should > > not be reclaimed. It was supposed to be fixed in firmware, but it was > > not. > > > > Upstream change also add possibility to configure which commands should > > not be reclaimed, but that option is not used - only original 6 commands > > are configured. So I did not backport that part, because it make things > > somewhat (not necessarily) complex. > > Yeah, looks fine. I'd hoped it was fixed for iwlwifi drivers (we > couldn't remember if it was 4965 only or not) but it turns out it wasn't > so this is needed. > > I don't know if there's anything I should do about this though? Sorry Johannes that was not intended to go to you and to the public. Stanislaw