On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 13:59 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Johannes Berg
> <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 05:22 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >
> >> ecode = ath9k_hw_process_ini(ah, chan, macmode);
> >> - if (ecode != 0)
> >> + if (ecode != 0) {
> >> + ecode = -EINVAL;
> >> goto bad;
> >
> > didn't this actually want to pass up ecode?
>
> Fuck yeah,
>
> bad:
> if (status)
> *status = ecode;
> return false;
What I meant was that it's overwriting the return value from process_ini
now, was that intentional?
johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
