From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:54440 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753836Ab1J1QZy (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:25:54 -0400 Message-ID: <4EAAD78F.8000009@candelatech.com> (sfid-20111028_182557_290010_8F6CE5C3) Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:25:51 -0700 From: Ben Greear MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [wireless-next PATCH 2/5] wifi: Support disabling ht40. References: <1319778680-11405-1-git-send-email-greearb@candelatech.com> <1319778680-11405-2-git-send-email-greearb@candelatech.com> (sfid-20111028_071139_530762_135DB41A) <1319789370.3914.11.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1319789370.3914.11.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 10/28/2011 01:09 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2011-10-27 at 22:11 -0700, greearb@candelatech.com wrote: > >> struct vif_params { >> int use_4addr; >> int disable_11n; >> + int disable_ht40; >> }; > > All the comments on patch 1 apply -- per connection parameter, > capability flag etc. > > I do wonder if it would be worthwhile to make it a u32 "connection > flags" or so instead of defining them separately. I don't care either way. If you want a single variable to hold the flags that is easy enough. We'd need to pass in a mask to allow user-space to change only a subset of flags at a time though. Thanks, Ben > > johannes > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com