On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 17:21 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > + atomic_inc(&bss->users); > > + atomic_inc(&bss->users); > > ? > That was just allocated, shouldn't it just be atomic_set() then? And why > two anyway? I was following the behavior in ieee80211_rx_bss_add(), where the same thing is done. It is needed to to avoid the bss being freed on the next ieee80211_rx_bss_put(), works as a reference count. Agree that atomic_set() would be better. > > + memset(&iwe, 0, sizeof(iwe)); > > + iwe.cmd = IWEVCUSTOM; > > + sprintf(buf, "Mesh network (version %d)\n" > > + "\t\t\tPath Selection Protocol ID: 0x%02X%02X%02X%02X\n" > > + "\t\t\tPath Selection Metric ID: 0x%02X%02X%02X%02X\n" > > + "\t\t\tCongestion Control Mode ID: 0x%02X%02X%02X%02X\n" > > + "\t\t\tChannel Precedence: 0x%02X%02X%02X%02X", > > Maybe we should add separate items for this to make it easier to parse > them? Ok, will include that too. -- Luis Carlos Cobo Rus GnuPG ID: 44019B60 cozybit Inc. - 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
