On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2014/1/17 Luca Coelho <luca@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 13:27 +0800, ZHAO Gang wrote:
>>> In following patch, replace b43 specific helper function with kernel
>>> api to reduce code duplication.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: ZHAO Gang <gamerh2o@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.c b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.c
>>> index 4ae63f4..50e5ddb 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.c
>>> @@ -821,10 +821,10 @@ void b43_rx(struct b43_wldev *dev, struct sk_buff *skb, const void *_rxhdr)
>>> * channel number in b43. */
>>> if (chanstat & B43_RX_CHAN_5GHZ) {
>>> status.band = IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ;
>>> - status.freq = b43_freq_to_channel_5ghz(chanid);
>>> + status.freq = b43_channel_to_freq_5ghz(chanid);
>>> } else {
>>> status.band = IEEE80211_BAND_2GHZ;
>>> - status.freq = b43_freq_to_channel_2ghz(chanid);
>>> + status.freq = b43_channel_to_freq_2ghz(chanid);
>>> }
>>> break;
>>> default:
>>
>> Why do you need this patch if you're going to remove these calls in the
>> next patch anyway?
>
> I was thinking about this for a moment too. You could just make a one
> patch and note in commit message that "translation" was reversed.
That would mean mixing fixes and improvements, which is something you
are not supposed to do, so IMHO having these split into two is
correct. Think about stable maintainers wanting the fix but not the
other change because it might introduce unknown side effects.
Jonas
>
> _______________________________________________
> b43-dev mailing list
> b43-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/b43-dev
--
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
