On Mon, 2007-10-15 at 18:00 +0900, bruno randolf wrote: > On Monday 15 October 2007 17:47:16 Johannes Berg wrote: > > > another solution i thought of was signalling the mac80211 layer that we > > > need padding which could then just adjust it's headerlen. but then > > > different drivers might need different padding in different places (i > > > don't know?). what do you think of this approach? > > > > That could be worthwhile, though the headerlen calculation is called > > very very often and adding another branch into it could very well impact > > performance worse than doing the memmove. > > now you confuse me. this is exactly what i attempted with the previous patch, > which you didn't like... ... for the reason that you put it into mac80211 rather than the atheros driver that requires this workaround. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
