On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 20:23 +0100, Ivo Van Doorn wrote: > >> However what I meant, is when skb->priority is 0, must the highest or the lowest >> priority be assumed? If it is the highest priority, then rt2x00 uses >> the incorrect >> naming, and all what is needed is to rename the fields everywhere in rt2x00. >> However is it is the lowest priority, then the naming is correct, and we must >> change the meaning, in which case we must rename and meaning. > > I'm working on this: > http://johannes.sipsolutions.net/patches/kernel/all/LATEST/012-mac80211-ac-defines.patch > > 0 is highest prio (AC_VO) Excellent. :) So that makes the bug in rt2x00 fortunately a naming-only thing. We don't need to map from mac80211 to rt2x00 values, but we simply need to search & replace the enumeration names to match the meaning. Ivo -- 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
