On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 00:47 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 00:44 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 08:41 +1000, Julian Calaby wrote: > > > > > > d) include two private pointers in each info > > > > struct passed between all these operations > > > > including doit(). (It's two because I'll > > > > need two in nl80211 -- can be extended.) > > > > > > Stupid question: > > > > > > Why not have a priv struct rather than an arbitrary array of two pointers? > > > > It'd have to be dynamically allocated, and the "arbitrary" array of two > > pointers can be on the stack. > > Maybe I should elaborate -- a priv struct basically means just a single > pointer, and then I'd have to allocate something to hold two pointers in > nl80211 and assign it to that single pointer. Come to think of it -- I could get away with a single pointer, since, if both are assigned, user_ptr[0] == wiphy_to_rdev(((netdev *)user_ptr[1])->ieee80211_ptr->wiphy) but that's a lot of pointy things, and some functions only have the rdev so it gets more complex. I think allowing two private pointers is a decent compromise. johannes -- 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
