From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755980Ab2CLPYP (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:24:15 -0400 Received: from shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk ([88.96.1.126]:59071 "EHLO shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755862Ab2CLPYN (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:24:13 -0400 Message-ID: <1331565826.3022.156.camel@deadeye> Subject: Re: [ 08/12] mac80211: zero initialize count field in ieee80211_tx_rate From: Ben Hutchings To: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan Cc: Willy Tarreau , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Roskin , "John W. Linville" Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:23:46 +0000 In-Reply-To: <4F5D9D3D.6090206@qca.qualcomm.com> References: <20120312002046.282831520@1wt.eu> <1331517472.3022.150.camel@deadeye> <4F5D7D47.102@qca.qualcomm.com> <20120312063412.GD8971@1wt.eu> <4F5D9D3D.6090206@qca.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-9HVS32+b4cb5ZfNWN9yh" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:470:1f08:1539:21c:bfff:fe03:f805 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ben@decadent.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shadbolt.decadent.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-9HVS32+b4cb5ZfNWN9yh Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 12:22 +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote: > Hi Willy, >=20 > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 10:06:23AM +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrot= e: > >>> So I'm pretty sure this patch is wrong for 2.6.32; it could be > >>> backported but I don't think the change is necessary anyway. > >> > >> true, but i think its better to initialize the count =3D 0 rather than > >> count =3D 1, though the older version driver checks for rate[i].idx>= =3D 0 > >> in ath_rc_tx_status. while the ath_tx_status has no such iteration in > >> the older driver code. > > > > In practice, if the patch brings nothing and not even correctness, I'd > > rather drop it than make us believe that some issue is fixed. However > > if you think it does happen to fix a real issue in 2.6.32 (possibly > > combined with some other missing patch), please tell me so and I will > > happily undelete it. > > >=20 > we can drop it. also as there was no driver code checking for=20 > rate[i].count in the 2.6.32 driver. i am also not sure this fixes=20 > something in 2.6.32 but the patch itself is correct. [...] Please read and answer the *whole* of my earlier message. The later code in the rate_control_get_rate() function in 2.6.32 does appear to depend on .count =3D 1, and there may be code elsewhere that does so too. Ben. --=20 Ben Hutchings Life would be so much easier if we could look at the source code. --=-9HVS32+b4cb5ZfNWN9yh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUAT14VAue/yOyVhhEJAQr+kg/+Om27bvY0/qwmmm9cdnjAd0MpS1uriEtF rKagSpmOmhNHyQ9UrC6tSrQVyQ7ryEXEOdqOGcl/9oQUqNbx5Zbr7LqtISRFsB+R 7uMz3ZeyaDfvrFQLRVfjPJxnGvOPZN360sa8Q9J1KrZcuyqhz8lKsN80oe3dYhxT a6kaoTv3ssgoVUlJYIFt7D3ZCLsqqACktzn8LobsHD8VKaaM7Rui3rbBLtE81cVN ntLRBAIwFvp+42xzrs0xQoSUIfHv5Kx0vqVA3qdiO4EXPxyfvEiGNDRZht69Uz2n 95UTT/J3IuurdQfKfTVhweBPgovkk4t9dp/V5UsVrw3VZ6Qs4X237DdlPFw//VBT y4qoIFRfkIQ36DZPL8mH5kHcugBXeJ5fSlA5bOr+IsWAv/RtHoVu9oeORf7NG56B c/E3ZUTp1eFK9nGJP+sjfq/ip90IbyGvlHgn/PLcyQLmutNqIN1Vb14JXWctqE7R LoyONwf1MEqf14TGU4Uv4FUBvOOJdOQ6QMEEW+VegRNWZVj47vtjTwl7vdgxqbCR aQ/b4o4cWRN02Cw6/IbHo00aTTFY8zX1fj5S797+4+gwi8qbC0z24QpJQCeZ53Cu vTLE/qTxtVG8h1g3n1xX6hOuEo70eG1hm3lWX275U64txtqwR6ewF3axAY3VjPVE b4QO1jAIoxY= =q7vn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-9HVS32+b4cb5ZfNWN9yh--