On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Johannes Berg
<johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 01:55 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>
>> >> +static inline
>> >> +int wiphy_idx(struct wiphy *wiphy)
>> >> +{
>> >> + struct cfg80211_registered_device *drv;
>> >> + if (!wiphy)
>> >> + return WIPHY_IDX_STALE;
>> >> + drv = wiphy_to_dev(wiphy);
>> >> + return drv->wiphy_idx;
>> >> +}
>> >
>> > I neither like the name of this function (same as the variable name) nor
>> > the function -- you're using it in exactly one place where you cannot
>> > ever pass NULL afaict.
>>
>> Nope, I'm calling it from 2 places:
>>
>> * Driver hints which never have the wiphy NULL
>> * __regulatory_hint: called from 11d hints, and from the workqueue
>> that processes the pending requests (which can come from userspace or
>> from drivers right now).
>
> Ok, but in the first case you can't have NULL, and in the second you
> could just inline it. It's not an operation that requires an inline here
> for it.
Sure, its just called twice and I think it makes the code more
readable to use a routine, what if I just move it to core.c or reg.c.
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
