From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from crystal.sipsolutions.net ([195.210.38.204]:33094 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932279AbXBSOTF (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 09:19:05 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] d80211: fix incorrect hw.priv setting in ieee80211_alloc_hw() From: Johannes Berg To: Pavel Roskin Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1171892584.8550.13.camel@dv> References: <20070217074208.348.69546.stgit@dv.roinet.com> <1171707397.3487.5.camel@johannes.berg> <1171835685.2201.4.camel@dv> <1171866799.3471.1.camel@johannes.berg> <1171892584.8550.13.camel@dv> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-OBL0cOp1m+QHMTOAOJVn" Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:18:56 +0100 Message-Id: <1171894736.3471.23.camel@johannes.berg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-OBL0cOp1m+QHMTOAOJVn Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 08:43 -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote: > Perhaps you misunderstood my idea. There is an field called priv in > struct ieee80211_hw. That field will be written to, no matter how good > the compiler is at optimization. And most drivers will access that > field by reading from memory. My mistake. I was thinking of struct wiphy.priv and not ieee80211_hw.priv. johannes --=-OBL0cOp1m+QHMTOAOJVn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Johannes Berg (powerbook) iD8DBQBF2bHQ/ETPhpq3jKURAthJAJwPYCl2fsSSJaGcorq1n0KIPjKcswCdFQhg XlRnKRmj/Tq7KwMLy1wplFg= =/9Se -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-OBL0cOp1m+QHMTOAOJVn--