Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vthiagar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 2019-09-05 16:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vthiagar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> On 2019-08-21 02:16, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2019-08-20 at 18:47 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +static int ath11k_mac_op_config(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u32
>>>>> changed)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct ath11k *ar = hw->priv;
>>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* mac80211 requires this op to be present and that's why
>>>>> + * there's an empty function, this can be extended when
>>>>> + * required.
>>>>> + */
>>>>
>>>> Well, oops. Maybe it shouldn't be required?
>>>
>>> I think we require this for some configuration handling. The comment
>>> is to be updated with proper information. We'll address that.
>>
>> The way I'm understanding Johannes' comment is that maybe we should
>> change mac80211 to require this op to be present. Should be easy to fix
>> in mac80211, right?
>
> Ok. So make this callback optional in mac80211? should be a simple
> code change.
Yeah, I was supposed to write:
"maybe we should change mac80211 to not require this op to be present"
But of course I could have just misunderstood, let's see what Johannes
says :)
--
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
