From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zhu Yi Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] d80211: add IEEE802.11e/WMM MLMEs, Status Code and Reason Code Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 13:24:21 +0800 Message-ID: <1166073861.2929.67.camel@debian.sh.intel.com> References: <20061214040204.GA10643@mail.intel.com> <200612132338.24077.flamingice@sourmilk.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Benc , John Linville Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:35551 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751596AbWLNF0q (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 00:26:46 -0500 To: Michael Wu In-Reply-To: <200612132338.24077.flamingice@sourmilk.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 23:38 -0500, Michael Wu wrote: > On Wednesday 13 December 2006 23:02, Zhu Yi wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Zhu Yi > > > You should probably have more in the description.. > > > --- > > > > include/net/d80211_mgmt.h | 148 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 148 > > insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > d80211_mgmt.h was recently merged into include/linux/ieee80211.h. > > > d83f6236e756f5f0bb1484d991884444f06704de > > diff --git a/include/net/d80211_mgmt.h b/include/net/d80211_mgmt.h > > index 87141d4..450c0a2 100644 > > --- a/include/net/d80211_mgmt.h > > +++ b/include/net/d80211_mgmt.h > > @@ -14,6 +14,39 @@ > > > > #include > > > > +struct ieee802_11_ts_info { > > + __le16 traffic_type:1; > > + __le16 tsid:4; > > + __le16 direction:2; > > + __le16 access_policy:2; > > + __le16 aggregation:1; > > + __le16 apsd:1; > > + __le16 up:3; > > + __le16 ack_policy:2; > > + u8 schedule:1; > > + u8 reserved:7; > > +} __attribute__ ((packed)); > > + > Mind eliminating the bitfields? Yeah, I thought of it. But if it is defined something like below struct ieee802_11_ts_info { short field; byte another_field; } ts_info; Then, up = (ts_info.field1 & 0x3800) >> 11; schedule = (ts_info.another_field & 0x01); So if I want to use "schedule", I need to know more details (i.e. which field it belongs to). Are these efficient? Thanks, -yi