From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-bk0-f50.google.com ([209.85.214.50]:50431 "EHLO mail-bk0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754347Ab3FKTtO convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jun 2013 15:49:14 -0400 Received: by mail-bk0-f50.google.com with SMTP id ik8so2253967bkc.23 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 12:49:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Christian Lamparter To: linville@tuxdriver.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] carl9170: make use of the new rate control API Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 21:49:09 +0200 Cc: Johannes Berg , Thomas =?utf-8?q?H=C3=BChn?= , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, nbd@nbd.name References: <1370966237-27716-1-git-send-email-thomas@net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de> <1E3747D2-BD9C-4136-B17F-9227E24136D5@net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de> <1370978668.8356.67.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1370978668.8356.67.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Message-Id: <201306112149.09768.chunkeey@googlemail.com> (sfid-20130611_214918_018140_18F53E6D) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tuesday, June 11, 2013 09:24:28 PM Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 21:17 +0200, Thomas Hühn wrote: > > Hi Christian, > > > > I have not seen that patch in wireless-next, that's why I overlooked it... sorry. You are right and it's not in wireless-testing.git either. That's a bit odd. John, was this patch overlooked/lost or was there a problem with it? (Or: can you please put it into wireless-next) > > > carl9170 already supports the new rate control API (Patch from 2013-04-23). > > > > > > > > > Can you please tell me what you think is missing? > > > > > > > You patch looks good to me. > > As I just saw an ath9k patch for rcu protection when ieee80211_get_tx_rates() is called. > > Should this be done in carl9170 as well ? > > I think that patch is wrong actually, probably should just do the rcu > protection inside the function. However the patch is completely wrong > anyway (C isn't python) so ... Uh, that's confusing. We are now talking about the patch from Thomas, right? If so: the previous "new rate control api" feature patch for carl9170 should be fine in this regard. Regards, Chr