From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D67F235348; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:40:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745570440; cv=none; b=sHaanb/xzklUPOfNpbPRTX+xjUjARvcwoil18Bg/0TGUzZmQdAnm7+u6ZwIDiieJpODiV6r5jxWMHI9paX7ED01uKvuHRCfcltQnDIhK8iFARoOk79zF/h0GmTsxklFw+hkvYQQsfe0GHE1xExBx3E04f9jbLruVYLIb9bUus38= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745570440; c=relaxed/simple; bh=x7suQfU8+JQR5c33reO5qChGwL2ucUnxvh4Mk9tBdUg=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=iaXXNjeFf76nHD42E8Va7j5Rpk+RHLyR3SpzcexjXP2aI0GVtxYQJmHRMci7FHz8xW2dwQ98zdj1gBjyBYrkUSXFBb9BGAbNBz1wGQwPl4Vnwe2uLyCC1gAKTqsBw7yS/VEyDXyos4WtRTkZSjChIib7MRZR93Anj+32L54K0zE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=lLWbeXS/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="lLWbeXS/" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=/VUSIghyqrguqoDHIl9mme3Sw4KuqhQY8/xEAAaYuPg=; t=1745570438; x=1746780038; b=lLWbeXS/vHcZAqHSf2pBLZn/rC7toCfvc+TPgkl9a2lNsLU y9Xzi76gjmH3X6eIyIE/E/sc1l9ylRYWLKS6S2DTv6yT23hykEZ9vrCwRxQNRjMBGulsPUFClKdsD +3vvwrZTEE0eBbYo1x1otPpU7f9FOneGbCJxlK8e6kjX/3z+lCov2SfOSCvfGYTJxltW9KChR7WHv dGrCiKgc4uB/wpZGzeS7AgOs1cCrpLunPOAVQPQmTd233AoAT89LoHV9eMdEHFyIphoycqaNH6vW3 +0KqBE1VT0WaDhNE1Gix43ArLKUIj3YS12ohdLmPNIg+PQMZ2VzYJAxEzRYoM2hg==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.1) (envelope-from ) id 1u8Ebr-000000019XY-1DJM; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:40:35 +0200 Message-ID: <44916ff608ee53238d79e57ee31fcbf86dfb672d.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH wireless-next 4/4] wifi: brcmfmac: Fix structure size for WPA3 external SAE From: Johannes Berg To: Arend van Spriel Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, brcm80211@lists.linux.dev, Ting-Ying Li , Ting-Ying Li , James Prestwood Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:40:34 +0200 In-Reply-To: <850b42ab-a637-4dd9-af18-e12523983ded@broadcom.com> References: <20250424194239.2825830-1-arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> <20250424194239.2825830-5-arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> <850b42ab-a637-4dd9-af18-e12523983ded@broadcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.54.3 (3.54.3-1.fc41) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Fri, 2025-04-25 at 09:57 +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote: > On 4/24/2025 9:42 PM, Arend van Spriel wrote: > > From: Ting-Ying Li > >=20 > > Add pmkid parameter in "brcmf_auth_req_status_le" structure to > > align the buffer size defined in firmware "wl_auth_req_status" > > structure. > >=20 > > Signed-off-by: Ting-Ying Li >=20 > Hi Johannes, >=20 > checkpatch issued a warning about From: and SoB: difference, but how to= =20 > resolve it. Both emails are stale so it does not matter, but I lean=20 > towards using the infineon email address as that is likely the most=20 > recent identity used given the company history. Please advice. I think you should probably keep whatever they used when they posted it. > > + u8 pmkid[WLAN_PMKID_LEN]; >=20 > Sure like the wifibot checks. Do run checkpatch and compile test for=20 > every patch before sending it out, but no kerneldoc. Will need to add=20 > kerneldoc for this struct field. Thanks :) johannes