From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753696Ab3AGIS3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2013 03:18:29 -0500 Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.220.41]:47221 "EHLO mail-pa0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751451Ab3AGIS1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2013 03:18:27 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 00:18:21 -0800 From: Jonathan Nieder To: Stanislaw Gruszka Cc: Ben Hutchings , Andreas Hartmann , Johannes Berg , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Helmut Schaa , "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: [ 104/173] rt2x00: Dont let mac80211 send a BAR when an AMPDU subframe fails Message-ID: <20130107081821.GF27909@elie.Belkin> References: <20121228190352.097882544@decadent.org.uk> <50DEA41E.6010409@01019freenet.de> <1356871099.4821.16.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> <1356871357.4821.19.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> <20130107080532.GA2984@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130107080532.GA2984@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21+51 (9e756d1adb76) (2011-07-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 01:42:37PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: >> To be clear, I have all of these in the queue: >> >> be03d4a45c09 rt2x00: Don't let mac80211 send a BAR when an AMPDU subframe fails >> 5b632fe85ec8 mac80211: introduce IEEE80211_HW_TEARDOWN_AGGR_ON_BAR_FAIL >> ab9d6e4ffe19 Revert: "rt2x00: Don't let mac80211 send a BAR when an AMPDU subframe fails" >> >> and I'm intending to drop/defer them all. > > Patch 3 is a revert of patch 1 (questioned patch). Please apply all 3 patches, > or only patch 2. Despite its title, isn't patch 3 not exactly a revert? It includes a change that depends on patch 2. I don't think patch 2 alone would have any effect. Jonathan