Re: Libertas: Association request to the driver failed

From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
Cc: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>, Daniel Mack <daniel@caiaq.de>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	libertas-dev@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Libertas: Association request to the driver failed
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 23:13:59 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090809191359.GG4805@lenovo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200908091310.56919.mb@bu3sch.de>

[Michael Buesch - Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 01:10:56PM +0200]
| On Sunday 09 August 2009 13:11:20 Roel Kluin wrote:
| > @@ -43,21 +44,21 @@ static int get_common_rates(struct lbs_private *priv,
| >  	u16 *rates_size)
| >  {
| >  	u8 *card_rates = lbs_bg_rates;
| > -	size_t num_card_rates = sizeof(lbs_bg_rates);
| >  	int ret = 0, i, j;
| > -	u8 tmp[30];
| > +	u8 tmp[*rates_size * ARRAY_SIZE(lbs_bg_rates)];
| 
| Is it a good idea to use dynamic stack arrays in the kernel?
| What about kmalloc for dynamic allocations?
| 
| -- 
| Greetings, Michael.

I saw one pattern in trace code (not sure if it's
still there) but personally don't like dynamic
stack arrays (though at moment the max value
being passed into routine is known maybe just
use MAX_RATES instead of (*rates_size)?). Hmm?

	-- Cyrill