From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:49813 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753085AbZKKAaP (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:30:15 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:19:45 -0500 From: "John W. Linville" To: Johannes Berg Cc: Rui Paulo , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/20] mac80211: implement RANN processing and forwarding Message-ID: <20091111001944.GA3087@tuxdriver.com> References: <20091110134802.GA55552@asus-p5b.lan> <20091110214350.GF12682@tuxdriver.com> <1E46D638-5BD4-4B59-9800-9A70595720B9@gmail.com> <1257894879.7037.70.camel@johannes.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: <1257894879.7037.70.camel@johannes.local> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:14:39AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 23:03 +0000, Rui Paulo wrote: > > Hi John, > > > > On 10 Nov 2009, at 21:43, John W. Linville wrote: > > > In file included from net/wireless/lib80211.c:19: > > > include/linux/ieee80211.h:566: error: ‘ETH_ALEN’ undeclared here (not in a function) > > > > Hmm, I must've busted my testing procedure. I'm sorry. > > > > Anyway, I noticed that nothing uses ETH_ALEN in ieee80211.h and there > > are quite some places we could use it. Should we include if_ether.h in > > ieee80211.h (probably too evil) or should I just keep using 6 instead > > of ETH_ALEN ? > > When John mentioned this I remembered falling into that trap before .. > maybe better to just keep using 6, sorry! I don't much care either way. FWIW I would tend to prefer ETH_ALEN over 6, so long as it doesn't break the build... :-) John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.