On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Marcel Holtmann <holtmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Luis, > >> > While reading through it, I came to think about regulatory_hint(). So is >> > there a use case where would give it the alpha2 code and the domain >> > itself at the same time? If not, then it would make more sense to split >> > this into two functions. >> >> Nope, you either pass an alpha2 or an rd domain which is built by you >> (and in that rd structure you can set the alpha2 to your iso3166 >> alpha2 or "99" if unknown). >> >> > Maybe something regulatory_alpha2_hint() and >> > regulatory_domain_hint(). Just a thought. >> >> That's how I had it originally but decided to condense it to one >> routine since as you could see they pretty much do the same thing >> except the case where the rd is provided it calls set_regdom(). >> Setting it back to use two routines if fine by me too. What is better? >> Can we just get this merged and then we can flip it around if >> necessary? :) I'm tired of carrying this around. > > my take on this is that if from an API perspective you can only use one > parameter or the other, then it should be two functions. This is reasonable, I'll respin, yet once again... Luis -- 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
