On Sun, 2008-09-07 at 00:25 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > + ieee80211_set_associated(sdata, ifsta, 0); > > This whole set_associated(0) vs. ieee80211_set_disassoc() business seems > fishy to me, can't we just move the set_associated(0) code into > set_disassoc? AFAICT there's only one caller now that calls with (0), > and that's in set_disassoc(). Ah, I see you're doing that in 3/3 johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
