From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Marek Lindner Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 23:38:57 +0200 References: <1307307664-19910-1-git-send-email-ordex@autistici.org> <1307307664-19910-3-git-send-email-ordex@autistici.org> <20110605215052.GW4071@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20110605215052.GW4071@lunn.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201106152338.58217.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 2/3] batman-adv: implement AP-isolation on the sender side Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking On Sunday, June 05, 2011 11:50:52 PM Andrew Lunn wrote: > Hi Antonio > > > +static bool _is_ap_isolated(struct tt_local_entry *tt_local_entry, > > + struct tt_global_entry *tt_global_entry) > > The general pattern i've seen in linux code is that a function _foobar > is a helper for a function foobar. I don't see an is_ap_isolated() > here. So i would just call it is_ap_isolated. I agree - I also wondered about where to find is_ap_isolated() when I saw _is_ap_isolated(). Regards, Marek