On Friday 24 August 2007 19:14:06 Larry Finger wrote:
> Johannes Berg wrote:
>
> The following hunk in wireless-dev/include/net/mac80211.h
>
> @@ -200,13 +199,13 @@ struct ieee80211_tx_control {
> * long retry value */
> u32 flags; /* tx control flags defined
> * above */
> + u8 key_idx; /* keyidx from hw->set_key(), undefined if
> + * IEEE80211_TXCTL_DO_NOT_ENCRYPT is set */
> u8 retry_limit; /* 1 = only first attempt, 2 = one retry, ..
> * This could be used when set_retry_limit
> * is not implemented by the driver */
> u8 power_level; /* per-packet transmit power level, in dBm */
> u8 antenna_sel_tx; /* 0 = default/diversity, 1 = Ant0, 2 = Ant1 */
> - s8 key_idx; /* HW_KEY_IDX_INVALID = do not encrypt,
> - * other values: keyidx from hw->set_key() */
> u8 icv_len; /* length of the ICV/MIC field in octets */
> u8 iv_len; /* length of the IV field in octets */
> u8 tkip_key[16]; /* generated phase2/phase1 key for hw TKIP */
>
> leads to a compiler warning "warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type"
> for b43 and b43legacy on the fiollowing statement.
>
> int use_encryption = ((!(txctl->flags & IEEE80211_TXCTL_DO_NOT_ENCRYPT))
> && (txctl->key_idx >= 0));
>
> What did a negative key_idx mean before? How is that condition represented now, or is it safe to
> drop the entire portion following the &&?
Simply drop the test for key_idx>=0.
It doesn't make sense to have two conditions in the tx control
to indicate use of encryption, so the negative key index was
removed and the DO_NOT_ENCRYPT flag is the one to test.
So you should probably remove the use_encryption variable, too,
and test the txctl->flags in the place where it's needed.
--
Greetings Michael.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
