On Tue, 2012-11-20 at 11:33 +0530, Mahesh Palivela wrote: > On 11/19/2012 07:41 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-11-19 at 17:48 +0530, Mahesh Palivela wrote: > > > >>> + case NL80211_CHAN_WIDTH_160: > >>> + if (chandef->center_freq1 != control_freq + 70 && > >>> + chandef->center_freq1 != control_freq + 50 && > >>> + chandef->center_freq1 != control_freq + 30 && > >>> + chandef->center_freq1 != control_freq + 10 && > >>> + chandef->center_freq1 != control_freq - 10 && > >>> + chandef->center_freq1 != control_freq - 30 && > >>> + chandef->center_freq1 != control_freq - 50 && > >>> + chandef->center_freq1 != control_freq - 70) > >>> + return false; > >> > >> Should we create a macro instead of +70 to -70 to take care of all 3 > >> cases 80, 80p80 and 160? > > > > Not sure, I hope we won't duplicate this code anywhere else, so I don't > > really think we need to? > > > > you kind of used it in cfg80211_check_beacon_chans() in wireless/chan.c > > for (freq = center_freq - bw/2 + 10; > freq <= center_freq + bw/2 - 10; > freq += 20) > > we can use in 3 switch cases, 80, 80p80 and 160. That's different code though, it iterates all the subchannels, while the previous one checks the offset. I don't see how to unify that with a single macro? 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
