On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 20:53 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 17:07 +0200, luciano.coelho@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > * I kept the return value in the sched_scan_stop chain, because, at least with > > wl12xx, the call can fail (due to OOM for instance). I think it's cleaner > > this way. > > What's going to happen then though? Would it make sense to pre-allocate > this at start() time, so it can cleanly stop regardless of what's going > on? I can see start() failing, but stop() failing seems a bit hard to > work with in wpa_supplicant? Actually so the nl80211 interface has to be able to return something like "no such operation in progress" or whatever, but I'm not sure about the driver interface -- -ENOMEM seems like a stupid failure for stopping something, and then the above applies ... 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
