From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754675AbcHVIkq (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Aug 2016 04:40:46 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:36224 "EHLO mail-wm0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752226AbcHVIko (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Aug 2016 04:40:44 -0400 Message-ID: <1471855240.16921.6.camel@open-mesh.com> Subject: Re: ath9k: Fix beacon configuration assertion failure From: Benjamin Berg To: Kalle Valo , Adi Ratiu Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath9k-devel@qca.qualcomm.com, ath9k-devel@venema.h4ckr.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Felix Fietkau Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:40:40 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87fuq1yt1x.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> References: <87fuq1yt1x.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.4-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fr, 2016-08-19 at 13:03 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > Actually, I see two patches which might be related but not identical: > > ath9k: fix client mode beacon configuration > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9247699/ > > ath9k: Fix beacon configuration assertion failure > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9281191/ > > Felix (CCed) & Benjamin: please take a look and advice which one I > should take. Yes, both patches are designed to fix the same issue in my patch. Felix solution looks entirely correct to me, the second solution seems slightly wrong because it prevents the call to ath9k_beacon_config from happening instead of ensuring the correct parameter value. ath9k_beacon_config needs to be called even if iter_data.beacons is false as it disables the interrupts. Benjamin