On 2012-06-27 4:30 PM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote: > From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <mohammed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > seems i got a message like this > ath: phy0: BT_Status_Update: is_link=0, linkId=2, > state=1, SEQ=-2085766476 initially. > > Signed-off-by: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <mohammed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/mci.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/mci.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/mci.c > index c40e568..64cc782 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/mci.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/mci.c > @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ static void ath_mci_msg(struct ath_softc *sc, u8 opcode, u8 *rx_payload) > > seq_num = *((u32 *)(rx_payload + 12)); > ath_dbg(common, MCI, > - "BT_Status_Update: is_link=%d, linkId=%d, state=%d, SEQ=%d\n", > + "BT_Status_Update: is_link=%d, linkId=%d, state=%d, SEQ=%u\n", > profile_status.is_link, profile_status.conn_handle, > profile_status.is_critical, seq_num); What about endian here? Also, wouldn't it be better to have a struct for the rx payload data with proper endian annotation instead of using the weird way of dereferencing the rx_payload pointer? - Felix -- 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
