On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 14:22 +0100, Michal Kazior wrote: > On 28 March 2014 14:11, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 2014-03-21 at 14:47 +0100, Michal Kazior wrote: > >> It doesn't make much sense to store refcount in > >> the chanctx structure. One still needs to hold > >> chanctx_mtx to get the value safely. Besides, > >> refcount isn't on performance critical paths. > >> > >> This will make implementing chanctx reservation > >> refcounting a little easier. > > > > Why bother with patch 11 then? > > I try to do one-thing-at-a-time. 11 is a fix, 12 is an enhancement. I > can squash it if you want? I guess it doesn't really matter, I was just wondering why you were bothering to fix it up if you're going to remove it :) 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
