On Wed, 2025-09-03 at 07:22 -0700, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> On 9/3/2025 1:01 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Fri, 2025-08-22 at 11:02 +0530, Sarika Sharma wrote:
> > > Currently, sta_set_sinfo() fails to populate link-level station info
> > > when sinfo->valid_links is initially 0 and sta->sta.valid_links has
> > > bits set for links other than link 0. This typically occurs when
> > > association happens on a non-zero link or link 0 deleted dynamically.
> > > In such cases, the for_each_valid_link(sinfo, link_id) loop only
> > > executes for link 0 and terminates early, since sinfo->valid_links
> > > remains 0. As a result, only MLD-level information is reported to
> > > userspace.
> > >
> > > Hence to fix, initialize sinfo->valid_links with sta->sta.valid_links
> > > before entering the loop to ensure loop executes for each valid link.
> > > During iteration, mask out invalid links from sinfo->valid_links if
> > > any of sta->link[link_id], sdata->link[link_id], or sinfo->links[link_id]
> > > are not present, to report only valid link information.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 505991fba9ec ("wifi: mac80211: extend support to fill link level sinfo structure")
> >
> > With a Fixes: tag for a commit in 6.17-rc, why should this not also go
> > to wireless for 6.17?
>
> Concur this should go through wireless instead of wireless-next. That was a
> miss on my part during internal review.
Sounds good. Hopefully I'll remember when I apply patches after wireless
gets pulled, maybe resend if you want to make sure :)
johannes
