> > But the below seems more compelling: > > > consistent IMO. If we should actually be treating >= 0 RSSI values as > > valid dBm values, then there should be a separate patch making all the > > relevant changes at once. For the purpose of this patch, that seems > > like an unnecessary (and potentially non-trivial) change in > > functionality that isn't mentioned in the commit message anyway. > > +1, it doesn't seem like a necessary change to accomplish the goal of > this patch. Ok, that makes sense. I'll send a v2 of this patch Andrei > > Brian _______________________________________________ Hostap mailing list Hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/hostap
