On 02/15/2008 11:08 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-static bool
+static int
ath5k_hw_setup_xr_tx_desc(struct ath5k_hw *ah, struct ath5k_desc *desc,
unsigned int tx_rate1, u_int tx_tries1, u_int tx_rate2, u_int tx_tries2,
unsigned int tx_rate3, u_int tx_tries3)
@@ -3773,10 +3773,10 @@ ath5k_hw_setup_xr_tx_desc(struct ath5k_hw *ah, struct ath5k_desc *desc,
#undef _XTX_TRIES
- return true;
+ return 1;
}
- return false;
+ return 0;
}
Shouldn't we then treat 0 as OK?
Sorry, I don't understand you. There is return -EINVAL in the function above
this too and we need to cope with another two states but the error: it is
supported/it isn't. You mean to consider 0 as supported, -ENODEV/-EOPNOTSUPP as
unsupported and the rest as error?
-
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