On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 21:46 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> On 04/23/15 at 04:38pm, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > From: Johannes Berg
> >
> > The conversion of mac80211's station table to rhashtable had a bug
> > that I found by accident in code review, that hadn't been found as
> > rhashtable apparently
On 04/23/15 at 04:38pm, Johannes Berg wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg
>
> The conversion of mac80211's station table to rhashtable had a bug
> that I found by accident in code review, that hadn't been found as
> rhashtable apparently managed to have a maximum hash chain length
> of one (!) in all ou
On 04/23/2015 06:09 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 11:59 -0400, David Miller wrote:
This fixes the "lost insertion" issue and consequently allows my
code to display its error (and verify my fix for it.)
It looks fine to me, but I'll let Herbert and Thomas review this.
Oh, s
On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 11:59 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> > This fixes the "lost insertion" issue and consequently allows my
> > code to display its error (and verify my fix for it.)
> It looks fine to me, but I'll let Herbert and Thomas review this.
Oh, sorry, didn't know Herbert was also involv
From: Johannes Berg
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 16:38:43 +0200
> From: Johannes Berg
>
> The conversion of mac80211's station table to rhashtable had a bug
> that I found by accident in code review, that hadn't been found as
> rhashtable apparently managed to have a maximum hash chain length
> of on
From: Johannes Berg
The conversion of mac80211's station table to rhashtable had a bug
that I found by accident in code review, that hadn't been found as
rhashtable apparently managed to have a maximum hash chain length
of one (!) in all our testing.
In order to test the bug and verify the fix I
