From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from hub022-nj-4.exch022.serverdata.net ([206.225.164.187]:20510 "EHLO HUB022-nj-4.exch022.serverdata.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932367Ab2HPNRO (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 09:17:14 -0400 Message-ID: <502CF2D5.6020704@posedge.com> (sfid-20120816_151831_632084_EB79E361) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 18:47:09 +0530 From: Mahesh Palivela MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stanislaw Gruszka CC: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "linville@tuxdriver.com" , "johannes@sipsolutions.net" Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfg80211: VHT (11ac) Regulatory change References: <952C5D5D0470AE4FB7D8A75C6ADC71CA0FCDD559@mbx022-e1-nj-10.exch022.domain.local> <20120816102211.GD17659@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20120816102211.GD17659@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 8/16/2012 3:52 PM, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 03:55:26PM +0000, Mahesh Palivela wrote: >> Handling of 80 MHz, 160 MHz channel bandwidths for VHT (11ac) Regulatory >> and setting channel flags for allowed bandwidths. >> >> Signed-off-by: Mahesh Palivela >> --- >> >> Sending patch second time as Stanislaw Gruszka complained its malformed. > > And now complaining that patch is ugly. There is really on other, > simpler way to handle that? > > Stanislaw > oh, you mean my implementation is ugly? Not a problem. Give me some clue, I will work on it. Best Regards, Mahesh