On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 19:53 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 18:53 +0000, Coelho, Luciano wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 17:04 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 17:25 +0200, Luciano Coelho wrote:
> > > > The return value of ieee80211_mesh_csa_beacon is not aligned with the
> > > > return value of ieee80211_csa_beacon() and
> > > > ieee80211_ibss_csa_beacon(). For consistency and to be able to use
> > > > both functions with similar code, change ieee80211_mesh_csa_beacon()
> > > > not to send the bss changed notification itself, but return what has
> > > > changed so the caller can send the notification instead.
> > >
> > > It seems to me that the caller should be updated?
> >
> > With this patch only, the caller just checks if the return value is < 0
> > (ie. an error), otherwise it assumes it was okay. With this patch, we
> > still return < 0 on errors, but we return positive, saying that the
> > beacon has changed.
> >
> > My next patch (5/5) changes the caller so that the value is used
> > properly (ie. ORing the return value to the changed variable).
>
> But doesn't that leave this patch broken?
No. We used to return 0 in case of success (or -ENOMEM on failure).
The caller checks the return value like this:
err = ieee80211_mesh_csa_beacon(sdata, params,
(ifmsh->csa_role == IEEE80211_MESH_CSA_ROLE_INIT));
if (err < 0) {
ifmsh->csa_role = IEEE80211_MESH_CSA_ROLE_NONE;
return err;
}
With my change, instead of returning 0 on success, we return
BSS_CHANGED_BEACON. The if (err < 0) will still evaluate to false, so
it will be the same as before.
Note that this patch is on top of the "mac80211: refactor
ieee80211_mesh_chanswitch()".
--
Luca.
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���zW����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
