On Wed, 2022-08-03 at 22:16 +0530, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan wrote: > > > > + u8 link_id; > > > }; > > > static inline u32 > > > > in other parts of the MLO code the link_id is defined as int and a value > > of -1 is used for a non-MLO link. but I don't know if that is currently > > universally true. > > > > if that is curently universally true, do we want to now have divergent > > definitions of a link_id? > > Good point, i see link_id is used both as unsigned and int based on > their usage. The reason I preferred unsigned is that we can make use of > the remaining 4-bits for some other purpose in future, > ieee80211_rx_status has size limitation. > It's a bit tricky though - do we want to have 0 for all the drivers that don't support MLO? Might not really be an issue, but OTOH not initializing it should probably not result in a valid value otherwise you might test something, think it's fine, and it really isn't. I think we should spend a bit to have a validity indication in this case. Even -1 wouldn't address it since you'd have to initialize to that. It works better the other way around in APIs etc. where we have a few producers and many consumers (cfg80211 down to drivers), but less well this way where we'd have to change drivers... johannes
