On Sun, 2012-03-04 at 14:49 -0800, Thomas Pedersen wrote: > >> For stack usage, it'd be better if you gave this two arguments (struct > >> rate_info *txrate, struct rate_info *rxrate), or maybe simply factored > >> out *only* the TX-rate bit? > >> > > > > like sta_set_rate_info(struct sta_info *sta, struct rate_info *txrate, > > struct rate_info *rxrate)? > > > > How do you feel about consolidating last_rx_flags and _index into an > > ieee80211_tx_rate? A bit odd maybe, but then we could use: > > > > sta_set_rate_info(struct ieee80211_tx_rate *rate, struct rate_info *rinfo); > > > > As needed for both last_rx and last_tx rates. Seems a little odd to first translate RX rate into TX rate and then to cfg80211 info? But you only care about TX rate anyway so ... why worry at all? 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
