Re: [PATCH v4] mac80211: Move reorder-sensitive TX handlers to after TXQ dequeue.

["Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>]

Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes:

>> > They have three possible values ... :)
>> 
>> Ah, no, not the handlers themselves. Meant the invoke_tx_handlers()
>> function (or all three of them after my patch; hence the plural). To
>> avoid the "0 means true" confusion you alluded to :)
>> 
>
> Ah. Actually, even I got confused and thought the return value *was*
> the same as the handler.
>
> I think it doesn't matter to be tricky, gcc is probably going to (have
> to) generate exactly the same code like when you explicitly put an if
> statement in there, it seems?

Yeah, was going to do that anyway. But since I'm touching the code
anyway, this might be an opportunity to avoid constructs like this:

if (!invoke_tx_handlers(tx))
  /* continue sending the packet */

Most other succeed/fail functions seem to be of type bool, so it would
help consistency as well. Unless there is some particular reason why
this function happens to be using 0 to indicate success?

-Toke