bruno randolf <bruno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > --- a/net/mac80211/ieee80211_sta.c >> > +++ b/net/mac80211/ieee80211_sta.c >> > @@ -80,6 +80,9 @@ static void ieee80211_rx_bss_put(struct net_device >> > *dev, struct ieee80211_sta_bss *bss); static int >> > ieee80211_sta_find_ibss(struct net_device *dev, >> > struct ieee80211_if_sta *ifsta); >> > +static int ieee80211_sta_join_ibss(struct net_device *dev, >> > + struct ieee80211_if_sta *ifsta, >> > + struct ieee80211_sta_bss *bss); >> >> No way, order the code properly, this mess needs to be cleaned up not >> added to. > > Do you care to explain what's so bad about function declarations? I don't know about Johannes, but I just see them as unnecessary burden. If I change some parameters in a function, I'll get a compiler error and only after that I realise to change the declaration as well. With public (ie. non-static) functions it's a different issue, because I know that there's a declaration in the header file. But with static functions this is not the case. -- Kalle Valo - 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
