On 02/15/2008 11:08 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Jiri Slaby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> -static bool >> +static int >> ath5k_hw_setup_xr_tx_desc(struct ath5k_hw *ah, struct ath5k_desc *desc, >> unsigned int tx_rate1, u_int tx_tries1, u_int tx_rate2, u_int >> tx_tries2, >> unsigned int tx_rate3, u_int tx_tries3) >> @@ -3773,10 +3773,10 @@ ath5k_hw_setup_xr_tx_desc(struct ath5k_hw *ah, >> struct ath5k_desc *desc, >> >> #undef _XTX_TRIES >> >> - return true; >> + return 1; >> } >> >> - return false; >> + return 0; >> } > > Shouldn't we then treat 0 as OK?
Sorry, I don't understand you. There is return -EINVAL in the function above this too and we need to cope with another two states but the error: it is supported/it isn't. You mean to consider 0 as supported, -ENODEV/-EOPNOTSUPP as unsupported and the rest as error? _______________________________________________ ath5k-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ath5k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath5k-devel
