2012/7/29 Thomas Huehn <thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi Nick,
>
>
>> Anyway if readability is the issue we can just do something like
>>
>> int txpower_halfdb = 0;
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> if(ah->power_level) {
>> txpower_halfdb = ah->power_level * 2;
>> } else {
>> txpower_halfdb = AR5K_TUNE_MAX_TXPOWER;
>> }
>>
>> and then it'll look like this
>>
>> ret = ath5k_hw_txpower(ah, channel, txpower_halfdb);
>
>
> I like this way you proposed here. But it is quite personal and compact
> wise the other version is in lead.
>
The thing is it doesn't initialize ah->ah_txpower.txp_requested, read below.
>> >
>> (wouldn't it be weird if someone from above asked us
>> what tx power was requested and we reply with max tx power ?).
>
> you mean in case someone from above did never requested something but
> ask us what was requested and we tell him that nothing was requested
> thats why we use max tx_power ... makes more sense ? :)
>
I mean that ah->ah_txpower.txp_requested or
ah->ah_txpower.txp_user_pwr in your case, both implicate that they are
initialized by the user. We shouldn't initialize them ourselves. Think
of it like this: we don't have permission to write this variable, we
only read it.
If you didn't like my example and you think it doesn't make sense,
here is another one:
How will we distinguish the case when a user asks for the max power
from the case where we have initialized ah->ah_txpower.txp_requested
to max ?
--
GPG ID: 0xEE878588
As you read this post global entropy rises. Have Fun ;-)
Nick
--
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
