On Wednesday 22 September 2010 12:34:35 Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 12:27 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: > > On Wednesday 22 September 2010 12:01:17 Johannes Berg wrote: > > > On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 11:58 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: > > > > On Wednesday 22 September 2010 03:36:14 David Miller wrote: > > > > > From: "John W. Linville" <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 16:17:05 -0400 > > > > > > > > > > Pulled, but I suspect the 'packed' attribute usage is wrong in > > > > > ath/carl9170 and can just be deleted. > > > > > > > > which __packed do you think can be removed? > > > > > > Well, there are bitfields in packed structs, which is either completely > > > wrong (think endianness ... never use them to interface with something > > > outside your own CPU), or needn't be packed. > > > > the header files (eeprom.h, wlan.h, hw.h, version.h, phy.h, fwcmd.h, fwdesc.h) > > are shared with the firmware, firmware tools and the userspace testbench. * (and of course the driver) > Oh, ok, so it is indeed used only on the firmware. But then why does it > need packing? Or is it some interface with the hardware? yes, the 64-bit hardware descriptor might be one reason. The other is that I don't want to hit the 320-byte boundary for standard 1500 octet frames. (and we get a free out-of-boundary check too.) Regards, Chr -- 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
