On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 10:09 +0100, Michal Kazior wrote: > On 22 January 2014 09:53, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 07:36 +0100, Michal Kazior wrote: > > > >> >> + if (!attrs[NL80211_ATTR_IFINDEX]) > >> >> + return -EINVAL; > >> 1: the old one, which has ifindex in the root > >> 2: the new one, which has wiphy in the root, and an array of (1) > >> within CH_SWITCH_IFACES (and each entry has ifindex at its root) > > > > Yeah I think I confused the two. This is handling case 1 only, right? > > No. It handles both cases. In general. I phrased it badly - by "this" I was referring only to the two lines above. > > But you have to check the ifindex manually since for case 2 you can only > > require the pre_doit() to give you the wiphy. > > In case 2 ifindex is not available in the attribute root. Can you > require pre_doit() to check ifindex if it's possible for ifindex to be > missing (case 2)? No, the way you're doing it is exactly right, I just got confused. 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
