From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.168]:58686 "EHLO wf-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754199AbZCZBfO (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 21:35:14 -0400 Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 29so365513wff.4 for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:35:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <43e72e890903251821i7b582601r877662790ceb747c@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090323162834.154525349@sipsolutions.net> <20090323163051.784425387@sipsolutions.net> <43e72e890903251821i7b582601r877662790ceb747c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:34:58 -0700 Message-ID: <43e72e890903251834i5e78bb7p3c96f2f5537f955c@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20090326_023517_783011_E822134F) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] mac80211: rewrite fragmentation From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" To: Johannes Berg Cc: John Linville , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > I see only one possible regression with this patch and that is that it > seems you forgot to update the mdev->trans_start in the new loop on > each fragment. > > As far as I can tell this would only introduce a regression with if > someone is using a netdev watchdog on the mdev, if we don't care about > that and I'm not missing any other case where this could be affected > we might as well remove that first update as at least for mac80211 its > completely untouched. > > Other than that: > > Reviewed-by: Luis R. Rodriguez Above is my actual reply, seems gmail stored it properly... hmm....... Luis