From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Martin Blumenstingl" <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>,
"Felix Fietkau" <nbd@nbd.name>,
"Arend van Spriel" <arend@broadcom.com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, "Rafał Miłecki" <rafal@milecki.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] cfg80211: allow passing struct device in the wiphy_new call
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 14:38:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1483364298.21014.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170102132747.3491-1-zajec5@gmail.com> (sfid-20170102_142831_033140_A7AF3467)
> --- a/include/net/cfg80211.h
> +++ b/include/net/cfg80211.h
> @@ -3730,8 +3730,8 @@ static inline const char *wiphy_name(const
> struct wiphy *wiphy)
> * Return: A pointer to the new wiphy. This pointer must be
> * assigned to each netdev's ieee80211_ptr for proper operation.
> */
> -struct wiphy *wiphy_new_nm(const struct cfg80211_ops *ops, int
> sizeof_priv,
> - const char *requested_name);
> +struct wiphy *wiphy_new_nm(struct device *dev, const struct
> cfg80211_ops *ops,
> + int sizeof_priv, const char
> *requested_name);
This is obviously missing documentation updates.
> */
> -static inline struct wiphy *wiphy_new(const struct cfg80211_ops
> *ops,
> +static inline struct wiphy *wiphy_new(struct device *dev,
> + const struct cfg80211_ops
> *ops,
Ditto.
It looks like you practically removed all users of set_wiphy_dev(), why
not do that completely and remove that entirely?
johannes
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Berg <johannes-cdvu00un1VgdHxzADdlk8Q@public.gmane.org>
To: "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Cc: "Martin Blumenstingl"
<martin.blumenstingl-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>,
"Felix Fietkau" <nbd-Vt+b4OUoWG0@public.gmane.org>,
"Arend van Spriel"
<arend-dY08KVG/lbpWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>,
devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
"Rafał Miłecki" <rafal-g1n6cQUeyibVItvQsEIGlw@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] cfg80211: allow passing struct device in the wiphy_new call
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 14:38:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1483364298.21014.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170102132747.3491-1-zajec5-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> (sfid-20170102_142831_033140_A7AF3467)
> --- a/include/net/cfg80211.h
> +++ b/include/net/cfg80211.h
> @@ -3730,8 +3730,8 @@ static inline const char *wiphy_name(const
> struct wiphy *wiphy)
> * Return: A pointer to the new wiphy. This pointer must be
> * assigned to each netdev's ieee80211_ptr for proper operation.
> */
> -struct wiphy *wiphy_new_nm(const struct cfg80211_ops *ops, int
> sizeof_priv,
> - const char *requested_name);
> +struct wiphy *wiphy_new_nm(struct device *dev, const struct
> cfg80211_ops *ops,
> + int sizeof_priv, const char
> *requested_name);
This is obviously missing documentation updates.
> */
> -static inline struct wiphy *wiphy_new(const struct cfg80211_ops
> *ops,
> +static inline struct wiphy *wiphy_new(struct device *dev,
> + const struct cfg80211_ops
> *ops,
Ditto.
It looks like you practically removed all users of set_wiphy_dev(), why
not do that completely and remove that entirely?
johannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-02 13:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-02 13:27 [PATCH V2 1/3] cfg80211: allow passing struct device in the wiphy_new call Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 13:27 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 13:27 ` [PATCH V2 2/3] dt-bindings: document common IEEE 802.11 frequency limit property Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 13:27 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 13:49 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-02 13:49 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-02 13:27 ` [PATCH V2 3/3] cfg80211: support ieee80211-freq-limit DT property Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 13:27 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 14:04 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-02 14:04 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-02 14:09 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 14:09 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 15:05 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 15:05 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 15:10 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-02 15:10 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-02 13:38 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2017-01-02 13:38 ` [PATCH V2 1/3] cfg80211: allow passing struct device in the wiphy_new call Johannes Berg
2017-01-02 14:05 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 14:05 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-01-02 14:10 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-02 14:10 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-02 22:10 ` kbuild test robot
2017-01-02 22:10 ` kbuild test robot
2017-01-08 7:38 ` kbuild test robot
2017-01-08 7:38 ` kbuild test robot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1483364298.21014.3.camel@sipsolutions.net \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=arend@broadcom.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com \
--cc=nbd@nbd.name \
--cc=rafal@milecki.pl \
--cc=zajec5@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.