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 49CD91864A for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 10:09:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="RQT1hArF" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 39981C433C8; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 10:09:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1704276558; bh=9UqvMLX6EMJc1T5xWDaYN7qaueGeM3k/Ik4UVL5/X4I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=RQT1hArFwbYJ+6apBnwPMz8tIZs047EtRdJmEqTGinPbshp1EayyI+Vk3ZOn7weoi YcYJ9nwj6p+W4z/QzTK5x3XIzOSfOL+994BKfdL1yhRNKygfh+1YrH7ttHjqsq8K6d f0ePcQyXIxZIfQsqwt7iNMemrBcSz6bIxj2FVckk= Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 11:09:15 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Philip =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=FCller?= Cc: "Berg, Johannes" , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , =?iso-8859-1?B?TOlv?= Lam Subject: Re: [Regression] 6.1.66, 6.6.5 - wifi: cfg80211: fix CQM for non-range use Message-ID: <2024010311-unbolted-extras-fa13@gregkh> References: <43a1aa34-5109-41ad-88e7-19ba6101dad3@manjaro.org> <2023121423-factual-credibly-2d46@gregkh> <779818b0-5175-449f-93fb-6e76166a325f@manjaro.org> <2023121450-habitual-transpose-68a1@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 10:45:05AM +0700, Philip Müller wrote: > On 17.12.23 00:58, Léo Lam wrote: > > On Sat, 2023-12-16 at 17:47 +0700, Philip Müller wrote: > > > > > > Leo provided the patch series here: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20231216054715.7729-4-leo@leolam.fr/ > > > > > > However, without a cover letter to it. Since we reverted Johannes' patch > > > both in 6.1.67 and 6.6.6 both patches may added to both series to > > > restore the original intent. > > > > > > > Ah sorry, I assumed the link I added in the patch description provided > > enough context! > > > > Also I should note that my Tested-by only covers 6.6.7, while Phillip's > > Tested-by covers both 6.1 and 6.6 as there are forum users who tested > > both. > > > > This is now part of 6.1.70, however didn't land in 6.6.x series yet ... Now queued up.