On 15-2-2017 10:48, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 10:36 +0100, Arend Van Spriel wrote: >> >>> I'm not really sure what to do - we don't really want to print a >>> message on something that might have been received from the peer, I >>> think? Though I suppose we should return 0 for the invalid >>> combinations, indicating that they're not supported. >> >> Ah. This is all non-functional code yet, right? At least having a >> static non-inline function in ieee80211.h will give build issues I >> would think. > > No, I marked it __maybe_unused so it'll be fine. I didn't want to have > it inlined if you use it multiple times in a single source file, but I > didn't want to move it to somewhere else either ...
Ah. Now I understand the trickery ;-) Was there really no "somewhere else" to move it, because honestly it is confusing and a bit wasteful if used multiple times in cfg80211 and/or drivers. Gr. AvS >> Anyway, I would indeed return 0 and have caller deal with that. > > Yeah, I'll do that. > > johannes >
