Re: [PATCH 07/13 v2] o11s: changes to ieee80211_sta

[Luis Carlos Cobo <luisca@cozybit.com>]

On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 17:21 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > +	atomic_inc(&bss->users);
> > +	atomic_inc(&bss->users);
> 
> ?
> That was just allocated, shouldn't it just be atomic_set() then? And why
> two anyway?

I was following the behavior in ieee80211_rx_bss_add(), where the same
thing is done. It is needed to to avoid the bss being freed on the next
ieee80211_rx_bss_put(), works as a reference count. Agree that
atomic_set() would be better.


> > +			memset(&iwe, 0, sizeof(iwe));
> > +			iwe.cmd = IWEVCUSTOM;
> > +			sprintf(buf, "Mesh network (version %d)\n"
> > +			"\t\t\tPath Selection Protocol ID: 0x%02X%02X%02X%02X\n"
> > +			"\t\t\tPath Selection Metric ID: 0x%02X%02X%02X%02X\n"
> > +			"\t\t\tCongestion Control Mode ID: 0x%02X%02X%02X%02X\n"
> > +			"\t\t\tChannel Precedence: 0x%02X%02X%02X%02X",
> 
> Maybe we should add separate items for this to make it easier to parse
> them?

Ok, will include that too.

-- 
Luis Carlos Cobo Rus       GnuPG ID: 44019B60
cozybit Inc.