From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail30s.wh2.ocn.ne.jp ([125.206.180.198]:2394 "HELO mail30s.wh2.ocn.ne.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752804Ab0G1I3j (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jul 2010 04:29:39 -0400 Received: from vs3017.wh2.ocn.ne.jp (125.206.180.250) by mail30s.wh2.ocn.ne.jp (RS ver 1.0.95vs) with SMTP id 1-0908175777 for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:29:37 +0900 (JST) From: Bruno Randolf To: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] iw: Add antenna configuration commands Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:29:38 +0900 Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <20100727094932.27300.10253.stgit@tt-desk> <201007281107.04455.br1@einfach.org> <1280299848.3832.2.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1280299848.3832.2.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Message-Id: <201007281729.38652.br1@einfach.org> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed July 28 2010 15:50:48 Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 11:07 +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote: > > On Tue July 27 2010 19:04:21 Johannes Berg wrote: > > > On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 18:49 +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote: > > > > + if (tb_msg[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_ANTENNA_TX] && > > > > + tb_msg[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_ANTENNA_RX]) { > > > > + printf("\tAntenna: TX %d RX %d\n", > > > > + nla_get_u8(tb_msg[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_ANTENNA_TX]), > > > > + nla_get_u8(tb_msg[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_ANTENNA_RX])); > > > > > > That's like the worst possible way to show the info. > > > > which way would you prefer? > > It occurred to me later that with the normal numbers we have (1 through > 7) it won't matter much ... but still, I'd prefer %#x. ok. changed that and the command line parsing to use "strtoul(argv[1], &end, 0)" so we can use hex, decimal or octal for the setting. i will resend the patches once a consensus is reached (or after an unspecified timeout ;)). bruno