On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 19:41 +0530, Balaji Pothunoori wrote:
> 
> +     if (ieee80211_hw_check(&sta->local->hw, REPORTS_TX_ACK_STATUS)) {
> +             if (sta->status_stats.ack_signal_filled && ((!(sinfo->filled &
> +                 BIT_ULL(NL80211_STA_INFO_ACK_SIGNAL))) ||
> +                 (!(sinfo->filled &
> +                 BIT_ULL(NL80211_STA_INFO_ACK_SIGNAL_AVG))))) {

Uh, wow, the indentation here is awful - please break with && and || on
the end of line and indent properly according to the nesting level.

If a line ends up being longer than 80, I think that's better than this
monster expression :)

> +                     sinfo->ack_signal =
> +                             sta->status_stats.last_ack_signal;
> +                     sinfo->filled |=
> +                             BIT_ULL(NL80211_STA_INFO_ACK_SIGNAL);
> +                     sinfo->avg_ack_signal =
> +                             -(s8)ewma_avg_signal_read(
>                               &sta->status_stats.avg_ack_signal);
> -             sinfo->filled |=
> -                     BIT_ULL(NL80211_STA_INFO_DATA_ACK_SIGNAL_AVG);
> +                     sinfo->filled |=
> +                             BIT_ULL(NL80211_STA_INFO_ACK_SIGNAL_AVG);
> +             }

Clearly your previous patch would even break the kernel compile since
the DATA_ACK_SIGNAL_AVG is still used here.



Finally, please also explain why you're adding this feature, at least in
the cover letter ("PATCH 0/2"), I can reuse that as a merge commit
message if necessary.

johannes

Reply via email to