On Sun, 2013-06-09 at 19:41 -0700, Thomas Pedersen wrote:
> > +static void mesh_bss_info_changed(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata)
> > +{
> > + struct ieee80211_if_mesh *ifmsh = &sdata->u.mesh;
> > +#define TEST_CHANGED_BIT(bit) \
> > + test_and_clear_bit(bit, &ifmsh->mbss_changed)
> > +
> > + u32 changed = TEST_CHANGED_BIT(BSS_CHANGED_BEACON) |
> > + TEST_CHANGED_BIT(BSS_CHANGED_HT) |
> > + TEST_CHANGED_BIT(BSS_CHANGED_BASIC_RATES) |
> > + TEST_CHANGED_BIT(BSS_CHANGED_BEACON_INT);
> > +#undef TEST_CHANGED_BIT
>
> Uhhh we should read all the bits here. Will fix and resubmit as v2.
Now that you're quoting it I'd also say that the macro isn't really
best, does removing it really make the code so much worse?
johannes
--
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
