From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 8D9E1DDB6 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2023 08:19:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="2uaeL8ER" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 90277C433C7; Thu, 14 Dec 2023 08:18:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1702541940; bh=FpHdXuSx6X/SeV2ntVhUOpyjzeoCmgTKDNKQBgUsSAg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=2uaeL8ERFWqVuDTZ96WkrSy+3oQYtjY5gEbE/vls/kSKFLvUNZF9Xy0S14WGYsB1B a25mRw3iQAWtztNCnD0oHBe4iCkwg13zyly7FAMmHjed8EvG1hMbXiYCre6yXIBG8R FQWgNCQKwaiXeCiXzDf5HcWAoaCmZGBOvUyR8Osg= Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 09:18:56 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: "Berg, Johannes" Cc: Philip =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=FCller?= , =?iso-8859-1?B?TOlv?= Lam , "stable@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [Regression] 6.1.66, 6.6.5 - wifi: cfg80211: fix CQM for non-range use Message-ID: <2023121423-factual-credibly-2d46@gregkh> References: <2023121139-scrunch-smilingly-54f4@gregkh> <2023121127-obstinate-constable-e04f@gregkh> <43a1aa34-5109-41ad-88e7-19ba6101dad3@manjaro.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 08:05:55AM +0000, Berg, Johannes wrote: > > > So Greg, how we move forward with this one? Keep the revert or integrate > > Leo's work on top of Johannes'? > > It would be "resend with the fixes rolled in as a new backport". No, the new change needs to be a seprate commit. > > Johannes, how important is your fix for the stable 6.x kernels when done > > properly? > > Well CQM was broken completely for anything but (effectively) brcmfmac ... That means roaming decisions will be less optimal, mostly. > > Is that annoying? Probably. Super critical? I guess not. Is it a regression or was it always like this? thanks, greg k-h