From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:35334 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751023Ab1HHNYe (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2011 09:24:34 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] mac80211: update mesh peering frame format From: Johannes Berg To: Thomas Pedersen Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linville@tuxdriver.com In-Reply-To: <1311638357-28740-5-git-send-email-thomas@cozybit.com> (sfid-20110726_020035_271179_DC9E109E) References: <1311638357-28740-1-git-send-email-thomas@cozybit.com> <1311638357-28740-5-git-send-email-thomas@cozybit.com> (sfid-20110726_020035_271179_DC9E109E) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2011 15:24:28 +0200 Message-ID: <1312809868.4372.33.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20110808_152437_666312_AC1B472C) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2011-07-25 at 16:59 -0700, Thomas Pedersen wrote: > -#define PLINK_GET_LLID(p) (p + 4) > -#define PLINK_GET_PLID(p) (p + 6) > +#define PLINK_GET_LLID(p) (p + 2) > +#define PLINK_GET_PLID(p) (p + 4) This is a more tangential comment -- but I'd feel more comfortable with the code if these macros were removed and some structs overlaid the IEs instead. But definitely not as part of this patch -- hence tangential. > + case WLAN_CATEGORY_SELF_PROTECTED: > + switch (mgmt->u.action.u.self_prot.action_code) { > + case WLAN_SP_MESH_PEERING_OPEN: > + case WLAN_SP_MESH_PEERING_CLOSE: > + case WLAN_SP_MESH_PEERING_CONFIRM: > + if (!ieee80211_vif_is_mesh(&sdata->vif)) > + goto invalid; > + if (sdata->u.mesh.security != IEEE80211_MESH_SEC_NONE) > + /* userspace handles this frame */ Will this compile in the CONFIG_MAC80211_MESH=n case? It seems like it might not? Do you routinely test that? johannes