On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 12:08:32PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 17:54 +0530, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote:
> > Add 20/40 BSS coexistence and intolerant channel report IEs.
>
> Can you make the subject "wireless" or "ieee80211" instead of
> "mac80211"?
>
OK
> > +/**
> > + * struct ieee80211_2040_bss_coex_ie
> > + *
> > + * This structure refers to "20/40 BSS Coexistence information element"
> > + */
>
> That documentation is incomplete.
>
Followed the existing IE struct documenting style.
> > +struct ieee80211_2040_bss_coex_ie {
> > + u8 element_id;
> > + u8 length;
> > +#define IEEE80211_2040_BC_INFO_REQ 0x01
> > +#define IEEE80211_2040_BC_40MHZ_INTOL 0x02
> > +#define IEEE80211_2040_BC_20MHZ_WIDTH_REQ 0x04
> > +#define IEEE80211_2040_BC_OBSS_SCAN_EXMPT_REQ 0x08
> > +#define IEEE80211_2040_BC_OBSS_SCAN_EXMPT_GRNT 0x10
>
> Please don't define them inside the struct, the docbook processing
> doesn't like that. Also BIT() would be nice to be more readable, and
> maybe make them an enum so they can have docs?
>
OK
> > +/**
> > + * struct ieee80211_2040_intol_chan_report
> > + *
> > + * This structure refers to "20/40 BSS Intolerant Channel Report"
> > + */
>
> Again incomplete docs. Come to think of it, maybe give pointers to the
> spec?
>
Followed the existing IE struct documenting style.
> > +struct ieee80211_2040_intol_chan_report {
> > + u8 element_id;
> > + u8 length;
> > + u8 reg_class;
> > + u8 variable[0];
> > +} __packed;
>
> Does that variable[] really belong to the report? Didn't check now.
>
Yes. It points to intolerant channel list (sec 7.3.2.58)
--
Rajkumar
--
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
