From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83E24C31E4B for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:10:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F91A21537 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:10:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728470AbfFNOKt (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jun 2019 10:10:49 -0400 Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([144.76.43.62]:42664 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728391AbfFNOKt (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jun 2019 10:10:49 -0400 Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1hbmul-00022V-PB; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 16:10:47 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] mac80211/ath11k: HE mesh support From: Johannes Berg To: Sven Eckelmann , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Cc: ath11k@lists.infradead.org Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 16:10:46 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20190612193510.29489-1-sven@narfation.org> (sfid-20190612_213642_840659_91049B7E) References: <20190612193510.29489-1-sven@narfation.org> (sfid-20190612_213642_840659_91049B7E) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-2.fc28) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Hi Sven, Two comments: 1) It seems to me that patches 1/2 really should be in opposite order, since you can't really claim HE mesh support in hwsim when you don't have it in mac80211? Or maybe I misunderstand? 2) This series breaks the wpas_mesh_max_peering wpa_supplicant/hwsim test, and I'm not sure why. Perhaps some length calculations are bad? johannes