From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ob0-f171.google.com ([209.85.214.171]:35089 "EHLO mail-ob0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752167AbaJFMnT (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2014 08:43:19 -0400 Received: by mail-ob0-f171.google.com with SMTP id va2so3785897obc.2 for ; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 05:43:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 07:43:07 -0500 From: Seth Forshee To: "Grumbach, Emmanuel" Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFT] iwlwifi: dvm: drop non VO frames when flushing Message-ID: <20141006124307.GB131459@ubuntu-hedt> (sfid-20141006_144325_504556_09171D1D) References: <1412517432-16309-1-git-send-email-emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com> <20141006123314.GA131459@ubuntu-hedt> <0BA3FCBA62E2DC44AF3030971E174FB31B53CBD4@hasmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <0BA3FCBA62E2DC44AF3030971E174FB31B53CBD4@hasmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 12:35:46PM +0000, Grumbach, Emmanuel wrote: > > Subject: Re: [RFT] iwlwifi: dvm: drop non VO frames when flushing > > > > On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 04:57:12PM +0300, Emmanuel Grumbach wrote: > > > + if (vif) > > > + scd_queues &= ~BIT(vif->hw_queue[IEEE80211_AC_VO]); > > > > I'm backporting this to 3.13, and this part doesn't work unless > > 77be2c54c5bd26279abc13807398771d80cda37a is also backported. Is this > > critical, or can it be omitted in the backport? > > > > 77be2c54c5bd26279abc13807398771d80cda37a isn't really critical, but it is a dependency, and it is safe IMO. > But I'd wait for a bit more testing :) The patch isn't even in my tree yet :) My backport is for testing too. Most of our bugs are against Ubuntu 14.04, which uses 3.13. Seems better to have them test this change in isolation rather than also testing everything which has changed up to 3.17. I agree the patch is safe, but I'd also prefer to have it tested in the form which would eventually get applied to the 3.13 extended stable tree. So I take it for stable you would advocate applying both patches?